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 52

post #766 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

How much better is the EX1000? Was the dynamic range of the 7550s the most compressed? I'm also assuming the 7550s didn't have enough air as it does graph with less treble. Guess that liquid polymer does the trick....Also, is the sound the same using the 7550's cable when compared to the EX600 cable? ty


It was more compressed than both and more forward in presentation.  I believe 3602 said the same?  Everything is really more in your face but the 7550 sounds good.  It's smoother and clearer than the 600 I believe but it comes w/ that presentation.  

 

I noticed no difference between the 7550 and 600 cable.  In fact I may have discovered the cause of the upper mid peak that's been bothering me on the EX1000.  Gain combined w/ Equal Loudness Contour.  Past a certain volume the EX1000 upper mids seemed to peak to a level that bothered me.  Switching the cable to another that had a few more ohms might have just dropped the gain enough to reduce the peak since I didn't really gain match as they were so closely spec'd.  Were talking a tick or two on the dial.  It would also explain why they hurt my ears at CES.  Less than ideal seal w/ loud ambient noise (probably around 80db give or take) caused me to crank the gain accentuating the peak far beyond normal listening levels.  Just a theory.  I'd need a few weeks and about 10 more people to offer anything more conclusive either way.  You'd be better off having dfkt taking multiple measures of the EX1000 w/ each cable to compare.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaman View Post

Quote:

How long have your EX1000s been used (broken in)?

How well do they keep the pace, and slalom thru Geddy Lee's bass rifs (e.g., in the central jam segment of Tom Sawyer)? As well as, say (and looking at your sig. IEMs), DBA02? Or RE262? Now a perhaps an unfair query ... compare/contrast with your HD800s.

 

Note: This is an open-book, open-notes exam. You will be graded on a curve.


They are James' EX1000s so they have seen more use than a two dollar whore.  The 600s and 7550s have the least usage by comparison.  No amount of burn in I've experienced will retrieve that level of dynamic range and ambience so I don't see a relevant change occurring.  

 

Lol, HD800.  Uh, come on, most top tier headphones can't even match it for that. tongue.gif It has the speed of a BA and electrostat w/ the body and texture of a dynamic and loses no detail.  Nothing escapes the HD800, all you have to do is get the voicing right through synergy.  DBA02 is awesome too but it lacks the subtle nuances of all the micro detail you'd find in the EX1000's dynamic range.  Not sure how much of that you need for Geddy Lee though.  The EX1000 isn't laid back or slow but it's no speed king.  Does quite well though without losing texture.  RE262 strikes me as laid back so would be the last choice for Rush of those you mentioned.     

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post


Thanks for the work you've put into these comparisons. Would you say the EX600 are still best bang/buck out of these, and are the 7550 closer to the 600 or 1000 in your book?


Tough question.  I would say if the 600 presentation works for you over the more forward 7550 then yes.  If the forwardness appeals to you, perhaps for those that like to rock out w/ some aggression then the 7550 wins.  If you could find the EX1000 for under $300 that would win best bang per buck over every universal I've heard.  So maybe the 7550 is closer to the 600 since neither does what the 1000 can do.

 

Let me say this.  If your gear might not resolve every last bit of detail from your recordings or you aren't that anal about extracting every last bit of detail possible, the EX1000 would make no sense above the others IMO.  Save your money.

 

Anyone else care to chime in as others have much more ear time on the 600 and 7550 than myself since I've been split 3 ways for so long.    

 

 

Yay!  As one out of one student I scored the highest!  A+ for me!!

 


Edited by Anaxilus - 7/1/11 at 12:09am
post #767 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Lol, HD800.  Uh, come on, most top tier headphones can't even match it for that. tongue.gif It has the speed of a BA and electrostat w/ the body and texture of a dynamic and loses no detail.  Nothing escapes the HD800, all you have to do is get the voicing right through synergy.  DBA02 is awesome too but it lacks the subtle nuances of all the micro detail you'd find in the EX1000's dynamic range.  Not sure how much of that you need for Geddy Lee though.  The EX1000 isn't laid back or slow but it's no speed king.  Does quite well though without losing texture.  RE262 strikes me as laid back so would be the last choice for Rush of those you mentioned.     

 

So what have you (or anyone) found to be a/the "speed king"? FX700s, Monsters, GR10s?  [Note: not 'speed' per kiteki's re-coining. Some call it 'energy', maybe 'rhythmic drive'. Whatever ... ]

"RE262 strikes me as laid back..." A lot of folks call the IE8s "laid back", but of all the cans I own, it has the most drawing-one-into-the-music ability concurrent with being able to "disappear" as a viable transducing entity. On that note -- and comparatively speaking of course --  I find the 530s fast but harsh/glarey/midrangey ... and SM3v2s mids-transparent + mids-detailed, but muddy/undetailed lower LF, hard unextended HF, compressive, boring and ultimately uninvolving.

 

A note about "laid back". Maybe that's an HQ amp vs. unamped issue?? With a good amp, one can increase gain w/o making the sound harsh/distortingly loud. I always amp (+ xfeed) so "laid back" can come fwd a bit w/o negative or side effects.

 


Edited by alphaman - 7/1/11 at 1:16am
post #768 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post



 


Perhaps you should re-consider whether you should appreciate some of my posts or not. Honestly. A couple of things I'd like to note:
 
1) I think you may have misunderstood my post, ie I was not really apologising to anyone; I thought that would've been more evident in the post I wrote after the one you quoted - perhaps my 'sense of humour' was not clear enough for all to understand.
 
2) I'm not against jargon per se. However, I come across countless posts that use (too much) jargon and I often get the impression some posters are only regurgitating stuff they've read elsewhere. So, part of me consciously has a tendency to try to avoid such terms or the use of flowery language also often seen round here and found in some so-called serious newspapers/publications as well. Very often those so-called reviews tell me more about the person writing them than the things they're writing about/reviewing. That's not to say, either, that I fully grasp every bit of audio jargon, but I also find myself often consciously refusing to 'understand' some of these terms.
 
3) I care about good sound like, apparently, we all do round here. However, I recently said elsewhere that I'd rather get a pretty poor recording of what I regard as real music than get the best ever recording made of whichever piece of music that lacks that element of 'real-ness' played on the best audio components. But I DO value (very) good sound as well.
 
4) To me music - what I regard as real music - is more mysterious, much harder to define & describe and, ultimately, more relevant in my life than whatever (expensive) piece of gear we happen to discuss here.
 
5) Yes, the community here can be very, very friendly, but I'm not the sort of person who normally appreciates or looks for such friendliness on HF or elsewhere. It's not that I prefer people who are nasty or unfriendly, but I just tend to keep away from those (too) willing to 'help',' teach' or show others (how to do) something. But I'd rather not discuss this subject here (or via PM).

 

 


Just to clarify: I am not a reviewer nor do I have the inclination to be one. I only post my impressions and sometimes discuss with others different gear/audio-related matters.
 
As for re-reviewing the SE535s, I think I did give them a fair shot, tested them several times, in fact, and compared them directly to the SM3 (an IEM I disliked even more), the UM3X and my ES3X - after all, I'd spent a lot of money on the SE535 when they were even more expensive than they are now (a year ago). At the time the the best universal I'd heard was the UM3X and found the UM3X markedly better. However, some seem to prefer the Shures & SM3s. Perhaps you appreciate some of the things I've written, but that doesn't mean we may appreciate the same type of sound reproduction. Thanks for the kind words, though.

 

Ok Fair nuff, If some or many like the UM3X more than the 535 or SM3 more thats Fine, but Bass Anemic? it reminds me of earlier posts when some said the 530's and the 535's are the same exact sound. I just have a problem with misinformation. nuff said

 

post #769 of 3028


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freefallr4545 View Post

Ok Fair nuff, If some or many like the UM3X more than the 535 or SM3 more thats Fine, but Bass Anemic? it reminds me of earlier posts when some said the 530's and the 535's are the same exact sound. I just have a problem with misinformation. nuff said

 

 


Well, bass, to me, sounded very light, aenemic perhaps being too harsh a word, and maybe a reflection of my utter disappointment, specially after the constant hype & exaggeration up to that point (I believe I may have been the first to mention any flaws on the then all-mighty SE535). I actually didn't like the SE530, either, but from memory, I preferred the SE530's overall SQ.
 
You have a problem with misinformation? Well, then music_4321 is definitely not your "favourite reviewer".  ;) I know the vast majority of people would likely disagree, but I actually preferred the $100 SE215 over the $400+ SE535, not because it's a more efficient IEM - it probably isn't - but the overall sound presentation of the SE215 was more convincing, more coherent and, ultimately, more pleasing to these ears.

 


Edited by music_4321 - 7/1/11 at 1:54am
post #770 of 3028

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

I think I am finally getting a little anxious now to hear the EX1000.

Well they could be a/the real thing  ... or it may be a viral-like CB phenomenon akin to recent SM3 hype. All IMO, of course.
 

 

post #771 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by HONEYBOY View Post

I know this is an apples to oranges comparison, but I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on how the EX1000 and the Stax SRS 2050 or even the baby stax, compare to each other.

 

Hi, here is a quick shot.

 

As you requested, I compared EX1000 with Stax SR-001 and 2020 (Basic model) that I have. While comparison to 2020 doesn't really make sense (there is no area where EX1000 are better :)), the situation with SR-001 is not that straightforward.

 

First of all, it strikes straight away how colored Staxe's midrange is compared to Sonys. Sony just sounds right to my ears, being more real. (Besides the upper midrange peak which is very annoying). 

 

Stax have much warmer mids (pleasantly), overall much darker, and muddier sound. More bass, especially mid bass. Little bit canned tone, not very transparent. Treble is much softer and less present (again, pleasantly so). 

 

Important to note, that while I hear that Sony have more real, life like presentation, like open windows to the music, I still greatly prefer colored Stax signature overall.

 

But the most interesting part, is the fact that Stax have much more resolution, it delivers more details then Sony's, more texture, and ambience is more pronounced with them. The same can be probably said abut any dynamic headphone.

 

On binaural records Stax give more convincing 3D soundstage then Sony. They fool me easier that sound comes from outside and imaging is better.   

 

What I like more? Overall, Stax, but sound signature vise, Sonys are objectively better. 


Edited by lelek45 - 7/1/11 at 4:18am
post #772 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaman View Post

"RE262 strikes me as laid back..." A lot of folks call the IE8s "laid back", but of all the cans I own, it has the most drawing-one-into-the-music ability concurrent with being able to "disappear" as a viable transducing entity.

 

You are talking about 'transparency' and that has two definitions.  Disappearing from your ears and also allowing the true nature of the source to pass through w/o coloration.  

 

A note about "laid back". Maybe that's an HQ amp vs. unamped issue?? With a good amp, one can increase gain w/o making the sound harsh/distortingly loud. I always amp (+ xfeed) so "laid back" can come fwd a bit w/o negative or side effects.

 

'Laid back' has nothing to do w/ amping.  I've been using portable amps for a long time and have seven different ones on my desk as we speak.  You can't make a phone perform faster than it's capable.  Laid back doesn't mean recessed, it's the opposite of being 'PRaTy'.  A couple of people seem to have made this mistake as well.  You seem to be talking about using gain to improve the balance in you equal loudness contour.     

 

I'm not sure but I think we have a bit of lexical ambiguity here so I'm not quite sure how you are hearing things.



 

post #773 of 3028
Thread Starter 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Laid back doesn't mean recessed, it's the opposite of being 'PRaTy'.  A couple of people seem to have made this mistake as well.


I agree with you that laid-back doesn't (necessarily) mean recessed, even though this much-cited Head-Fi glossary says otherwise:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fordgtlover View Post

Laid-back - Recessed, distant-sounding, having exaggerated depth, usually because of a dished midrange. Compare "Forward".

 

In my understanding 'laid-back' IEMs are 'relaxed' sounding, that's why I think it's rather the opposite of 'aggressive' than of 'PRaTy'. I believe laid-back IEMs can still have compelling pace, rhythm and timing. The Ortofon e-Q7 come to mind, especially with fast-paced jazz recordings, because of how they manage to stay relaxed and still sound infectious at the same time.

 

As for the Sony EX1000 (and EX600), I perceive them as being closer to relaxed than aggressive as well, but nevertheless they do a hell of a good job in getting my toes tapping.

post #774 of 3028

 

OK, let's have a look at the 'unstoppable' EX1000 hype:
 
As far as I know, four HF'ers (james444, cn11, tuahogary & music_4321) have declared the EX1000 the best phone they've heard. Of the four, two of them often post on this thread, the other two hardly ever post these days. As far as I can remember - and this only from memory, so I'm sure I'm getting a couple of things wrong here - the following HF'ers have had some issues with the EX1000s:
 
-- cliffroyroycole -- liked the EX1000s but preferred the W4 & Sony 7550, not convinced by the EX1000's form factor.
--kunlun -- finds the Atrios have better bass extension, specially sub-bass - might still prefer the Atrios over the Sonys
--Anaxilus -- likes the EX1000s but has to find a way to 'circumvent' a rather nasty peak in the 5-7k region
--inks -- I get the impression he'd favour the FX700 over the EX1000s from his comments on the EX600s
--shotgunshane -- still having second thoughts on whether the Sony's bass is for him or ultimately not. Seems to love 2 others phones. I get the impression he may actually prefer the FX700s, perhaps even the W4s over the EX1000s?
-- i2ehan -- his favourite is the SM3, followed by the W4
--MaxwellDemon -- issues with harsh treble, ultimately not convinced by the EX1000s and sold them
--dfkt -- his favourite is the SM3 followed by at least 5 other IEMs before the EX1000s
--lelek45 -- finds the treble too harsh, seems to prefer at least one other phone
 
A few of the 13 people mentioned above have reported issues with fit, tips, isolation & ear hangers. It's been said by quite a few that the EX1000s may not be suitable for out and about use, specially in loud environments (the underground, buses, planes, etc). My advice, once again, FWIW, if you still think you have to have the EX1000s is: get the EX600 instead, save yourself some money and you'll probably get around 90% (maybe a little more/less) of the sonic qualities of the EX1000s. So, this is my latest contribution to most hyped phone on HF, the EX1000.
 
Now, with that out of the way, here's another song where the EX1000s, in my view, perform remarkably well. PLEASE excuse me if I don't use terms such as the T word, PRaT, micro details, speed, and other equally complex audio terms. The EX1000s, to me, simply do a brilliant job here, like no other phone I've heard. 

Edited by music_4321 - 7/1/11 at 3:01pm
post #775 of 3028

Don't forget I find the EX1000 (and EX600) horribly uncomfortable and actually completely unfit for daily use. That's a main part of why I rank the EX lower than it probably should be. Sound isn't everything, when the fit is so utterly wrong that you want to punch Sony's "ear shape engineer" right in the face for doing such an incredibly bad job. They sound great, if only they would be wearable.

post #776 of 3028

^ All the more reason not to recommend the EX1000 or even the EX600, though the EX1000 is not exactly $800 as stated on the ABI site.

 

I hate to admit, though, that I find both EX1000 & EX600 supremely comfortable, but I guess I'm the odd one out.


Edited by music_4321 - 7/1/11 at 3:16pm
post #777 of 3028

Oh the ex1000's have enough bass for me, I was having some issues understanding why I was getting better bass extension on my macbook pro versus my iPhone 4.  Considering the iPhone 4's graph is pretty flat across the spectrum, I'm assuming it is current or power but I'm not positive, as I'm just learning/reading about sources and amps.  I'd say the difference is about 10% or so better bass extension from the MBP.  Anyway the zo really helps and the Sony's love it.  But I can't declare a winner between the 3: Sony, JVC and Westone.  I like them all so much and for different reasons.

post #778 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

Oh the ex1000's have enough bass for me, I was having some issues understanding why I was getting better bass extension on my macbook pro versus my iPhone 4.  Considering the iPhone 4's graph is pretty flat across the spectrum, I'm assuming it is current or power but I'm not positive, as I'm just learning/reading about sources and amps.  I'd say the difference is about 10% or so better bass extension from the MBP.  Anyway the zo really helps and the Sony's love it.  But I can't declare a winner between the 3: Sony, JVC and Westone.  I like them all so much and for different reasons.


In that case you're not part of the huge hyping EX1000 team - sorry.

 

post #779 of 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post




In that case you're not part of the huge hyping EX1000 team - sorry.

 

 

My timbre for hyping is off. tongue.gif
 

 

post #780 of 3028

@music. I actually have heard the EX1000s briefly and I would say that they are my favorite universal yet, but the price is ridiculous at the moment.

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