New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Brainwavz M3 Review - Page 4

post #46 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by SplashArtist View Post

My brainwaves m2 (visang actually but they are the same) the cable on them was horrible, it cracks after awhile from your skins oils, well on mine anyways. These use the same cable.



what do you secrete...acid 0_o?

 

JKJK, the strain reliefs on mine keep splitting

post #47 of 90

ya and the strain reliefs broke off on mine and the actual headphone shell came off aswell, they were decent headphones though. i would say on par with meelecs m6 even though the m6's are way cheaper. overhyped headphone i think.

post #48 of 90

Hi All we are looking for head-fier to audition our new M3, more info here: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/526247/brainwavz-m3-audition-program-reviewers-wanted

 

 

 

 

post #49 of 90

Been looking for the Hippo gumstick, but they never respond to my e-mails.  Then I saw the Nanite N2 with Brainwavz M3 Pre-order deal and decided to take it up.  Hope I like them ;)

post #50 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadano View Post

I compared my M2s (yes M2) with my friends Sennheiser IE8 (definitely genuine; he bought them from Sennheiser directly) a few days ago. I found them to sound rather bland, unlively and boring. Much more balanced than M2, yes, but I want to enjoy my music, not analyse it. I didn't believe my ears as I expected them to be A LOT better than M2. I listened them on my M6 TS with flat EQ, everything turned off except Spatializer (PCE level3), but I compared them without Spatializer  as well. Maybe I prefered M2 because of lower impedance, but even when I turned on the volume on IE8, they didn't impress me much. Bass was more interesting on M2, although IE8's bass knob was turned to max. 

I guess that this is due to the silicone tips my friend had on his IE8 not perfectly fitting my ears (it were those tiny bi-flanges). I'll try them again with other tips, maybe they just require a good seal to show their strengths. 

 

So yeah, I guess the M3s must be awesome, considering I'm already really amazed by the M2s.


 

Oh yeah.  I definitely feel you on that.  Personally, I've tried all the famous Sennheiser models and I don't see the hype.  At this point I'm actually kind of mad because I couldn't imagine what I'm about to say being the way it is.

The Sennheiser HD 595's were on sale on Amazon recently for $150 and I was just furious when I heard them.  Expecting something godly for the price they're originally at, especially considering their size, not even a wow - rather, instantaneous notations of flaws.  I must say, in the end, I was satisfied IN GENERAL with the sound, but with no complaints maybe if at $100 as the ORIGINAL price.  I STRONGLY prefer my $60 Brainwavz M2 IEM's in almost every regard, and that's just absurd...

These 595's have this interesting (what I see as) gimmick where it has speakers on the outsides for "more effect" I'm guessing and to increase the soundstage which output the sound that's meant to sound distant/relatively more distant, like the effect that's often used with harmonized voices or whatever.  Separate from comparison and just in its own right, I don't like it.  I call it a gimmick because it's interesting and fun, especially from the outside where it sounds like I'm listening through significantly loud speakers, but in terms of the actual sound, the EQ is different to that of everything else and it makes it a bit too distant to be honest..  Not everyone would notice something like that of course but obviously those aren't the people that would discuss these things in the first place.  In conclusion, I actually prefer the soundstage of the M2's to these, which technically have a larger one.

Don't even get me started on the bass.  Honestly, yes, it is significantly extended, but overall, very weak sounding - pathetic even.  There's absolutely no thump in any song regardless, techno or otherwise, nor is there any "buzz" for any bass parts that are supposed to "woo" which is pretty much in most songs of Rock.  You simply just hear it all with no sort of expression...  And no, it doesn't have what's called an analytical sounding lower EQ, e.g., the whole point of bass in Techno or Dance music is to thump which as I've mentioned is nonexistent.  Max bass amplification on my Onkyo receiver gets it to the power/tone level necessary but that obviously really screws up the EQ.

Overall the sound is very distant.  My surround system feels like it has a closer sound than them.  This is possibly because I'm used to IEMs which have the sound go directly in you, but regardless, for the price, especially in relation to a $60 pair of small IEM's, nobody should have any complaints.  Treble is a bit more accurate maybe, mids are less powerful, and overall it requires more volume.  So what's left?...  And this comparison was done with the Sennheiser's through my receiver whereas the M2's simply through my Cowon PMP.  With a 3.5mm converter connected to a PMP or just the computer, they completely suck for their value in my opinion - barely acceptable for even half that...


Anyway, actually to why I'm posting specifically here aside from the above response: firstly I'm wondering how treble of the M3's compares to the M2's.  From the review it sounds about the same which I'm okay with; even slightly better would be great.  Also, even though the mids on the M2's were astounding, that was mainly with instruments.  I found that in most case, vocals were buried under everything ever so slightly, compared almost to anything else.  It was perfectly audible, just slightly buried.  That'd probably be my biggest, if not only complaint.  I like to here every last breath out of Freddie Mercury's vocals :D  Anybody would be able to give me a hint as to how the M3's compare in that regard?  Thanks.

 

In general, I find the level of warmth on the M2's perfect and I'm hoping that remains with the M3's even with the seeming slightly more analytical sound approach.


Edited by Typhoon859 - 12/19/10 at 1:04am
post #51 of 90

Wow, great post, Typhoon! Nice to read similar experiences, I thought I was the only person who prefered M2 (although we compared them to different phones and even phone types).

 

ClieOS' reviews have been pretty accurate and helpful for me, and as he writes that M3 are more distant and not so much "in-your-face" like M2 (which I LOVE), I won't buy them. To me, M2's bass already hit really low and hard, so I don't think I'd be much hapier with M3.

I agree with you that vocals stay behind the instruments on M2, but to me it's so little that it doesn't bother me. Fortunately, I'm pleased with them and not infected with the Head-Fi virus yet, so I'm gonna stay with my M2s.

post #52 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadano View Post

Wow, great post, Typhoon! Nice to read similar experiences, I thought I was the only person who prefered M2 (although we compared them to different phones and even phone types).

 

ClieOS' reviews have been pretty accurate and helpful for me, and as he writes that M3 are more distant and not so much "in-your-face" like M2 (which I LOVE), I won't buy them. To me, M2's bass already hit really low and hard, so I don't think I'd be much hapier with M3.

I agree with you that vocals stay behind the instruments on M2, but to me it's so little that it doesn't bother me. Fortunately, I'm pleased with them and not infected with the Head-Fi virus yet, so I'm gonna stay with my M2s.

I've come to the same conclusion, lol, thanks.

 

Thanks also for sharing that initially.

post #53 of 90

The M2s are such a fun IEM for the price.

I have the M2s and the re-zeros and they are both very different IEMs.

They both get the same listening time from me.

I have a feeling the M3s will probably give me something in between.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhoon859 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadano View Post

Wow, great post, Typhoon! Nice to read similar experiences, I thought I was the only person who prefered M2 (although we compared them to different phones and even phone types).

 

ClieOS' reviews have been pretty accurate and helpful for me, and as he writes that M3 are more distant and not so much "in-your-face" like M2 (which I LOVE), I won't buy them. To me, M2's bass already hit really low and hard, so I don't think I'd be much hapier with M3.

I agree with you that vocals stay behind the instruments on M2, but to me it's so little that it doesn't bother me. Fortunately, I'm pleased with them and not infected with the Head-Fi virus yet, so I'm gonna stay with my M2s.

I've come to the same conclusion, lol, thanks.

 

Thanks also for sharing that initially.


 


Edited by paulypaul - 12/20/10 at 6:48pm
post #54 of 90


Hi Typhoon, the M3 has less treble than the M2. M3's a little on the dark side, but not bad at all for most music, if you listen to violin concertos it is apparent in a lack of sparkle that can be heard very easily with a side by side comparison to, say, a well amped HD600. However on its own the balance never sounds emphatically unnatural to me in the way that the M2 can with some music. Good levels of detail can be heard in the treble and they're more forgiving of over bright recordings. If you want a nice clear presentation of vocals in comparison to the M2 then the M3 is a very good option. The M2 is just warm of neutral from my point of view - at least not cold. In general the M3 doesn't sound like a modified version of the M2, it's quite a different creature.

 

I hope that helps...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhoon859 View Post


Anyway, actually to why I'm posting specifically here aside from the above response: firstly I'm wondering how treble of the M3's compares to the M2's.  From the review it sounds about the same which I'm okay with; even slightly better would be great.  Also, even though the mids on the M2's were astounding, that was mainly with instruments.  I found that in most case, vocals were buried under everything ever so slightly, compared almost to anything else.  It was perfectly audible, just slightly buried.  That'd probably be my biggest, if not only complaint.  I like to here every last breath out of Freddie Mercury's vocals :D  Anybody would be able to give me a hint as to how the M3's compare in that regard?  Thanks.

 

In general, I find the level of warmth on the M2's perfect and I'm hoping that remains with the M3's even with the seeming slightly more analytical sound approach.

post #55 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by lecky View Post


Hi Typhoon, the M3 has less treble than the M2. M3's a little on the dark side, but not bad at all for most music, if you listen to violin concertos it is apparent in a lack of sparkle that can be heard very easily with a side by side comparison to, say, a well amped HD600. However on its own the balance never sounds emphatically unnatural to me in the way that the M2 can with some music. Good levels of detail can be heard in the treble and they're more forgiving of over bright recordings. If you want a nice clear presentation of vocals in comparison to the M2 then the M3 is a very good option. The M2 is just warm of neutral from my point of view - at least not cold. In general the M3 doesn't sound like a modified version of the M2, it's quite a different creature.

 

I hope that helps...

That does help, thank you.  If it's a little darker and has a little less warmth, even if more neutral/balanced in that regard or any other, I personally would still prefer my M2's because I find it perfect.  I'm scared that in the future I won't be able to find this exact level of warmth again even. 

 

It's true what you say that with the M2's sometimes a song can sound unbalanced.  But, it's in a way that just doesn't sound random.  If anything, it still makes it interesting - possibly more impressive, even if wrong.  There's only been one song that I found it actually ruined so far...  M3's sound great for their value, from everything I've gathered, but for the type of sound they're leaning towards, it makes them less unique and in this case, there are similar sounding better headphones that would be required if you're truly looking for that kind of sound.  For this reason, I'm sticking with the unique M2's which in their own right stand up against any other pair of headphones in a very wide range.

 

Thanks again. 


Edited by Typhoon859 - 12/22/10 at 11:28am
post #56 of 90


thats the great thing about IEMS, Headphones ECT.  The previous model doesn't become obsolete.  Stick with what you like~

Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhoon859 View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by lecky View Post


Hi Typhoon, the M3 has less treble than the M2. M3's a little on the dark side, but not bad at all for most music, if you listen to violin concertos it is apparent in a lack of sparkle that can be heard very easily with a side by side comparison to, say, a well amped HD600. However on its own the balance never sounds emphatically unnatural to me in the way that the M2 can with some music. Good levels of detail can be heard in the treble and they're more forgiving of over bright recordings. If you want a nice clear presentation of vocals in comparison to the M2 then the M3 is a very good option. The M2 is just warm of neutral from my point of view - at least not cold. In general the M3 doesn't sound like a modified version of the M2, it's quite a different creature.

 

I hope that helps...

That does help, thank you.  If it's a little darker and has a little less warmth, even if more neutral/balanced in that regard or any other, I personally would still prefer my M2's because I find it perfect.  I'm scared that in the future I won't be able to find this exact level of warmth again even. 

 

It's true what you say that with the M2's sometimes a song can sound unbalanced.  But, it's in a way that just doesn't sound random.  If anything, it still makes it interesting - possibly more impressive, even if wrong.  There's only been one song that I found it actually ruined so far...  M3's sound great for their value, from everything I've gathered, but for the type of sound they're leaning towards, it makes them less unique and in this case, there are similar sounding better headphones that would be required if you're truly looking for that kind of sound.  For this reason, I'm sticking with the unique M2's which in their own right stand up against any other pair of headphones in a very wide range.

 

Thanks again. 

post #57 of 90

Hi can anyone help me, I recently bought a pair of these but the pack didn't come with foams. My ears are really small and pretty much the only tips that I like are small comply T-140 which I use with ADDIEMs. Does anyone know what comply tips I should get as they aren't featured on the list selector on comply's website.

post #58 of 90

Comply T400, TX400 and S400 will fit.

post #59 of 90

I have been requested to post my short review here instead of the other M3 forum, so, here we go

 

 

Sound Sig:

Bass: Less emphasis on the mid bass compared to the brainwavz m2’s. Bass extends lower compared to M2’s without the mid bass that got In the way of details in the mid range and treble.  More bass emphasis than RE0’s another highly regarded phone under $100.

Treble: very good, cymbals sound very crisp/realistic (emphasis on treble) very similar to RE0’s though there are other phones out there that sound even crisper/cleaner in the treble area. Just like the Westone 3’s, the m3’s give female voices a certain air of authority.  Not enough treble to seem aggressive/fatiguing by any means. Extension is average/decent

Mids: are fine, with a slight emphasis on par with the emphasis on the treble.

Overall, I would say the M3’s are Treble/mid oriented phones just like the RE0’s

Soundstage: very good instrument separation, unlike many IEM’s, the sound isn’t in your face/in your head. Much less in your face compared to the M2’s. positioning is average, nothing special here, more left/right then front, center and back.

 

Build quality

:No chin slider (not a big deal, but it would have helped the overall package. Same complaint with the M2’s.

:Lack of strain relief near earpieces though the durable cable makes up for this aspect. Perhaps the lack of strain reliefs can be attributed to the way they were intended to be worn  (over ears)

:Cables are very durable, has a bit of memory. Cabling is the best I have seen in the under $100 price range.

:Very nice packaging, compares very well to similar offerings from other manufacturers in the price range. In fact, the packaging is superior compared to the vacuum molded packaging that is near impossible to open without scissors.

 

Comfort:

:Microphonics are evident when worn down the ears, over the ears, microphonics are still noticeable but greatly reduced. Once again, a chin slider would have helped further

:unique shape didn’t give me any fit issues. In fact, when worn with the earpieces facing forwards (cabling entrance pointing forward just like westones) the earpieces don’t brush against the side of my ears like the flexible strain reliefs of the westones

 

 

Overall package:

Same accessories as the brainwavz m2, a convenient hardcase, clip and 3 sizes of tips. (M2’s/brainwavz phones used to ship with foam tips as well, but as of 25/12/2011 foam tips aren’t included anymore) no big loss, IMO, the foam tips were detrimental to the sound quality.

post #60 of 90

Hmm

Just wondering if i should buy these from a fellow head-fier, or something else...

How do these at $65 compare to something like the M2 at $50ish, or something higher like Fischer Audio eterna/SB's for $75 or RE0/xcapes for $90?

Mostly interested in enjoying my music, and people seem to say that the M2 are significantly more enjoyable than the M3's?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: