[Review] Impressions of the Sony EX1000 versus the FX700, GR10 and e-Q5 - Page 178

ER4S is pretty much flat, those who measure various IEMs and do monitoring pretty much establish it as such for a reason. 

It is, pretty much.  I do think more would use a UERM than the ER4 professionally and it has more bass to my ears.  As you know I have no issue w/ deep insertion, that's how I roll.  I get more midbass from the dBA than the ER4 but DBA's lack extension by comparison.  I also find the ER4P to sound rather boomy at times and sharply bright though they don't seem to graph much different from the 'S'.  'S' I can listen to endlessly, 'P' kills me in less than 2 minutes.  There is also an unfinished debate about what truly neutral bass at the ear should graph like though the deviation is rather small.  Same for headphones.  It's actually very complicated and goes beyond FR so we should probably avoid it here. 

A V-shaped response isn't always bloated like the HJE900s or even the TF10s case, these are an example of that. 

That's what 'U' curves are for.    I'd still need to reproduce more bass on the EX1000 to agree but I understand what you are saying and hearing.

Not sure if I remember, but did you hear my GR07 or joker's? There's a difference between the two. 

I don't recall, but it was a bit bass boosted, treble harsh, unrefined and not reference to my ears.  It had that bio-cellulose 'attack' and flavor to it.

It is, pretty much.  I do think more would use a UERM than the ER4 professionally and it has more bass to my ears.  As you know I have no issue w/ deep insertion, that's how I roll.  I get more midbass from the dBA than the ER4 but DBA's lack extension by comparison.  I also find the ER4P to sound rather boomy at times and sharply bright though they don't seem to graph much different from the 'S'.  'S' I can listen to endlessly, 'P' kills me in less than 2 minutes.  There is also an unfinished debate about what truly neutral bass at the ear should graph like though the deviation is rather small.  Same for headphones.  It's actually very complicated and goes beyond FR so we should probably avoid it here. 

I don't think that's the case yet for the UERM, though who knows with time. I don't believe in complete neutrality, as it just doesn't happen, but manufacturers should do their research and get at least as close as possible. Nowadays IEMs are more about flash, do something cool in the design, hype up the price and expectation bias is going to make it sound substantially better (there's a very good article about this, which I can't sadly quote). 

I don't recall, but it was a bit bass boosted, treble harsh, unrefined and not reference to my ears.  It had that bio-cellulose 'attack' and flavor to it.

My GR07 was a rev.2 which was easily bassier than the EX1000s. I don't like the GR07's treble either, a bit grainy and still has a spike in the ear's sensible region, surprisingly not that sharp though sibilant. Rev.1 (joker's) has what I think is the GR07's main strength, moderate bass to midrange neutrality with a nice subbass boost. I don't think rev.1 is better, more like on par for a fraction of the price. 

does ex1000 need an amp to be completely driven? (or an amp is just needed to color the sound?)

I have searched this thread and others, but can't find any clear statement.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/sony-mdr-ex600-and-mdr-ex1000-ear-headphones

says: ex1000 need to be amped

http://www.head-fi.org/t/548726/review-sony-mdr-ex1000

says: not necessary to be amped

thanks

I wonder whether I'd qualify for this discussion, since my approach to listening seems to be so different to Inks' and yours. Apart from my review work or occasional A/B requests, I never ever listen analytically and focus on detail, but rather indulge in the experience as a whole. I doing so, my standard is realism/credibility of sound and presentation, as compared to live performances, which I have pretty good experience with (as a listener, not player).

My approach to listening is holistic as well, but FR is king and then perhaps transient speed/imaging. I do take detail into consideration because a transparent tone is going to reveal the most pure, detailed tone in relation to the recordings. I don't like the approach of relating things to a live performance, because not all recordings are done in such a way, an IEM should reveal the placing of each mic rather than trying to color it into something else. 

Therefore it doesn't make much sense, from my rather holistic point of view, to talk about neutrality and disregard presentation. For example, the UERM may stay a bit more neutral in the mids and the EX1000 may exhibit a slight dip, but the UERM's vocals sound actually a bit too close for a realistic spatial presentation. You don't get that sense of closeness in a real audience, unless you're perhaps listening to an acoustic concert in a very intimate venue.

Soundstage is an important aspect as well, but I think it's quite a tricky matter to discuss. Soundstage size is probably the most subjective aspect there is and I can't help but feel a lot of it is based on emotions and expectation bias. To me, the EX1000 does sound bigger than average for an IEM, but still pretty much has a closed presentation in relation to certain headphones and speakers. To me the CK10 or ER4S in no way sound tiny or congested in comparison, just a tad closer but their superior imaging give you a better sense of placement. 

I think soundstage size isn't as important of a matter in soundstage presentation as is imaging, which isn't a big strength on the EX1000s. EX1000s slight midrange dip is a coloration that places certain things back in the presentation, but not all, certain things are still forward. You may have the perception of a singer being more far back, but the bass player is still right upfront. With a more neutral tone and better imaging, you get a more pure presentation to the recordings and the driver's speed enables a more organized presentation of where everything is placed. 

Same goes for detail, you simply don't get that kind of meticulous separation in any venue I know of. The Vienna Golden Hall is world-famous for its acoustics and I can confirm that it's an outstanding experience to attend a classical concert there, but the instruments still blend noticably more together than on highly analytical IEMs. So, if the EX1000 might be hiding some minute detail as compared to the ER4S (which I haven't heard), that might actually be a good thing in my book, as it probably makes them sound more realistic and believable.

I think the EX1000s blending is a weakness, you get a slightly more muddied presentation in comparison the CK10/ER4S. In relation to the recordings, a more neutral IEM will present just how forward a detail is going to be, midrange detail is important to the musical experience as it enables a more pure tone. EX1000s coloration compromises more because that midhigh presentation does bring in forward those specific details whereas more detail in the fundamental midrange will be preferred, that unfortunately is masked a bit by the signature. 

Last not least, regarding bass, again this hardly qualifies as a third opinion in the spirit of your discussion, since I usually don't dissociate impact from texture. Instruments like cello or double bass sound more credible on the EX1000 to my ear, because they're slightly better textured. So, even if the UERM may be closer to neutral from a quantitative point of view, imo the EX1000's bass sounds more realistic overall.

Can't help but feel that you just simply prefer a beefier subbass region, that does not mean it's more realistic just beefier. I am lately in amazement of how much extension and rumble the CK10 has, nothing to envy the EX1000s. It's bass is much faster though, so you don't get that slower decay. Wouldn't want it any other way though, EX1000s bass just doesn't present itself in a more organized matter in imaging. EX1000 can sound a bit off to me once the cello's harmonics hit the midhighs and it's overtones don't sound as nicely laid out. I listen to a lot of double-bass to my Jazz background, CK10's bass sounds more credible because it's more precise in transients and yet maintains good depth and rumble. EX1000 to me compromises a bit much of the former to have the latter. 

These are my 2c, don't shoot me, lol.