Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [Review] Impressions of the Sony EX1000 versus the FX700, GR10 and e-Q5
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Review] Impressions of the Sony EX1000 versus the FX700, GR10 and e-Q5 - Page 184

post #2746 of 3029

  EX1000 doesn't change much with fit/tips, it's of very low acoustic impedance. The tips James made will help with seal rather than to tame the midhighs, matter of fact tips mostly just change the very high treble as Anaxilus pointed out a while back. The 7550's weakness is actually in that very high treble, so wide-bore tips help it more than it does the EX1000. Rin will measuring the 7550 soon, he says that based on his subjective listening it sounds quite neutral, but misses that bandwidth/air of the EX1000, no surprise. 

 

  Surprised you get no sibilance at all James, maybe your listening is just all done in quieter environments where the lower volume levels helps tame that peak. Even raising it up a notch *(not to excessive levels, mind you), doesn't yield anything?

 

Very surprising as James is the only extensive EX1000 user that has had no issue whatsoever, recordings will have a say as well though.

 

I will say that the EX1000 is the best dynamic IEM I have heard, it just has that weakness in just one spike, though again, it's of low isolation anyway so I used them in quieter environments where that peak is tamed by lower volume levels (yet not too low to sound dull). I haven't heard the GR07MKII, haven't done an A/B with the 7550 (though have heard them before) and the RE272 can also be contenders for the best performance dynamic IME. But I am going to get a chance to try all these soon ;)


Edited by Inks - 10/16/12 at 5:47pm
post #2747 of 3029
The reason I don't care for the EX1000 for metal is because they're too relaxed. I don't want my metal to be presented in a relaxed fashion, and those crunchy guitars just lack bite and power with the Sonys. My favorite phones...just not for metal.
post #2748 of 3029

you guys should change your crappy ex600 cables with an ex1000 cable. it should reduce those peaks by a margin IME. i barely believe in cable changing the sound but this is on of those examples that acually changes.

 

one minimeet we had a few months ago i had a friend who demoed an ex1000 with ex600 cables and he didn't like it at all, too much treble and sibilance going on he said.. i suggested to try the ex1000 cables and he agreed, so i swapped the ex600 cable to an ex1000 cable and after my friend trying it again, he was really impressed with the sound since the "bad treble" definitely toned down to the point that he liked the ex1000 and bought a pair after a few days.

 

heck, the ex800 cable is slightly better than the ex600 one for those people who are wanting a bit of a bass punch to their ex600/ex1000.

 

also agreed with lee that the 7550 does not produce sibilance at all, except if the song itself produces too much

post #2749 of 3029

  That's a good point, it is a bit relaxed exactly in the "crunch" region of the FR, 2-4k, as shown here. Not too bad, but if you're demanding of more there, it falls short a bit, no biggie though IMO thus why I rarely mention, but YMMV. 


Edited by Inks - 10/16/12 at 7:10pm
post #2750 of 3029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selenium View Post

The reason I don't care for the EX1000 for metal is because they're too relaxed. I don't want my metal to be presented in a relaxed fashion, and those crunchy guitars just lack bite and power with the Sonys. My favorite phones...just not for metal.


I couldn't even listen to rock period on the EX1000 because it was way too aggressive. Funny how we all hear things so differently. I did find that a proper fit was needed or the sibilance would be that much worse. Not that it solved the problem but at least helped it somewhat.

post #2751 of 3029
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post

I couldn't even listen to rock period on the EX1000 because it was way too aggressive. Funny how we all hear things so differently. I did find that a proper fit was needed or the sibilance would be that much worse. Not that it solved the problem but at least helped it somewhat.

There's a difference between the slight passive nature of the midrange crunch regions in the EX1000, and the somewhat aggressive nature of the EX1000's spike in the midhighs. I wouldn't always equate things to being heard differently, but defined, pin-pointed and graded in a different matter while hearing it about the same. 

post #2752 of 3029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

There's a difference between the slight passive nature of the midrange crunch regions in the EX1000, and the somewhat aggressive nature of the EX1000's spike in the midhighs. I wouldn't always equate things to being heard differently, but defined, pin-pointed and graded in a different matter while hearing it about the same. 


I wouldn't know inks because I couldn't focus on those aspects of the EX1000 because the sibilance overtook everything. Just stuck out like a soar thumb not allowing any enjoyment.

post #2753 of 3029

A proper fit for IEMs is always important, your ear is part of the construction. The volume of the ear is the 2. part of the speakers enclosure. No wonder so far, everybody hear different results.

 

Cable change: If your sound getting physically better by changing the cables, you should try to color your CDs with a green pen, or demagnetize your sources, or at least put them over a non metallic pyramide.

 

No doubt, subjective soundquality is way better with all this tuning. ;-)

post #2754 of 3029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airwin View Post

A proper fit for IEMs is always important, your ear is part of the construction. The volume of the ear is the 2. part of the speakers enclosure. No wonder so far, everybody hear different results.

 

Cable change: If your sound getting physically better by changing the cables, you should try to color your CDs with a green pen, or demagnetize your sources, or at least put them over a non metallic pyramide.

 

No doubt, subjective soundquality is way better with all this tuning. ;-)


I believe him regarding the cable having an effect on the sound. Not only him but a few other headfiers have confirmed the same thing, including Anaxilus. I have also experienced sound changes with different cables. Even on my LODs. Enough so where I will not like the sound or love it. Like with my DX100 I'll generally use my Copper cable (LOD) instead of the silver cable as the silver cable adds too much emphasis on the treble and upper mids, making it fatiguing. It's not in my head. It's what I hear. I could care less if you agree or not. It would be like me calling you tin-eared ;). Not sure if you'd like that either.


Edited by lee730 - 10/17/12 at 12:34am
post #2755 of 3029

Cables can make a difference, but it depends on the IEM, whether the IEM's nature can really change with less resistance. Problem is a lot of the times it's placebo. EX1000 doesn't change with  cables, you're better off using the lowest OI source if anything. It's impedance phase does suggest a slight change in that sibilance region with a more efficient cable, but it's so small (about or less than 0.5db), the fact that the mind knows it's tamed probably has more of an effect than anything. 


Edited by Inks - 10/17/12 at 12:43am
post #2756 of 3029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Cables can make a difference, but it depends on the IEM, whether the IEM's nature can really change with less resistance. Problem is a lot of the times it's placebo. EX1000 doesn't change with  cables, you're better off using the lowest OI source if anything. It's impedance phase does suggest a slight change in that sibilance region with a more efficient cable, but it's so small (about or less than 0.5db), the fact that the mind knows it's tamed probably has more of an effect than anything. 


How can you say that though Inks when these people didn't expect any sort of change? How can that be accounted for? If you cannot hear the change and they can does that make them wrong? It could just be you can't hear it. I know people don't like to hear that but hey that could very well be the reason as well.

 

Regardless if the cable makes a difference on the EX1000 or not I wouldn't bother. If the cable is indeed at fault it's Sony's fault for providing such a crappy cable to begin with. They should be ashamed of themselves for what the IEM cost. I can guarantee you they cost nowhere near the price to make as they charge so I see no reason for this, especially when mass producing. This type of business practice is why Sony has been failing for all these years and will continue to fail.


Edited by lee730 - 10/17/12 at 12:53am
post #2757 of 3029

I'm sorry, it was not my intention to start a cable discussion. So yes ... there could be slight differs if the capacity or resistance varies. But only slight ...

 

 

BTT

 

post #2758 of 3029
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post

How can you say that though Inks when these people didn't expect any sort of change? How can that be accounted for? If you cannot hear the change and they can does that make them wrong? It could just be you can't hear it. I know people don't like to hear that but hey that could very well be the reason as well.

  Well, there is a change, but if it's so small, I would say that the mind may make it bigger than it is. Anaxilus was quite honest about it saying that it was much smaller than what he first though, he said it was practically the same at the end. No need to make it into, "you can't hear it, I can", sort of thing, I'm a fairly young and healthy individual, my hearing is great. There's nothing tangible there, cables don't have any magically properties we can't observe, they change the sound because some are more efficient than others, but for some IEMs that doesn't matter much, period. 

 

Take the impression above, post 2748, the user that said the 7550 cable sounded better to him/his friend than the EX600 cable. I can tell you that one right off the bat is placebo or something else is overlooked, both of those cables were tested by Anaxilus to have the same exact conductivity properties. 


Edited by Inks - 10/17/12 at 12:58am
post #2759 of 3029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

  Well, there is a change, but if it's so small, I would say that the mind may make it bigger than it is. Anaxilus was quite honest about it saying that it was much smaller than what he first though, he said it was practically the same at the end. No need to make it into, "you can't hear it, I can", sort of thing, I'm a fairly young and healthy individual, my hearing is great. 

 

Take the impression above, post 2748, the user that said the 7550 cable sounded better to him/his friend than the EX600 cable. I can tell you that one right off the bat is placebo or something else is overlooked, both of those cables were tested by Anaxilus to have the same exact conductivity properties. 


You see that's the very think Inks. The mind is responsible for interpreting sound. What may seem small to you can be large to others. That is my point. Hearing is tied to your brain.

post #2760 of 3029

  There's nothing tangible there, cables don't have any magically properties we can't observe, they change the sound because some are more efficient than others, but for some IEMs that doesn't matter, it will still sound about the same, the EX1000 is one. 0.5 or less is never large to anyone, unless you're having a placebo effect.

 

  Now an IEM like the TF10 can really change a lot more with cables. 

 


Edited by Inks - 10/17/12 at 1:01am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [Review] Impressions of the Sony EX1000 versus the FX700, GR10 and e-Q5