Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Build quality, UM compared to JH and Earsonics?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Build quality, UM compared to JH and Earsonics?

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

Hi guys I'm looking for a custom IEM with good build quality. Having read the forums for awhile, seems like nothing can match UM for its build quality. However, I would like to consider some other options too. How is the build quality of JH audio compared to UM? Is it way inferior?

 

Anyone here owns both Earsonics and JH audio IEMs? please share if earsonics customs have similar, worse or better build quality compared to JH audio. And if im not wrong, UM definitely has better build quality than both of those? blink.gif

 

Thanks.

post #2 of 15

I only have one of the three, Earsonics, and they fill the shell with solid acrylic, so it is rock solid.  They seem great, but my two other customs are very different as one is a half size and a hollow shell (as all other acrylic shells that I know of are) and the other is made of thermoplastic and, well, different.  From what I have read, UM is top notch and JH has some issues.  All I can say about the Earsonics is they seem rock solid with good workmanship.

post #3 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post

I only have one of the three, Earsonics, and they fill the shell with solid acrylic, so it is rock solid.  They seem great, but my two other customs are very different as one is a half size and a hollow shell (as all other acrylic shells that I know of are) and the other is made of thermoplastic and, well, different.  From what I have read, UM is top notch and JH has some issues.  All I can say about the Earsonics is they seem rock solid with good workmanship.


Is it true that the Earsonics customs provide less sound isolation? Any dents/scratches on the Earsonics IEMs? I heard it has a shorter canal though..

 

many thanks.

post #4 of 15

They isolate the best of my three customs.  The tip does seem a little shorter than what I have seen in pictures.  And no dents/scratches, but there are tiny bubbles inside from when the did the acrylic fill.  Not a big deal to me, but not the best looking in the world.

post #5 of 15
Thread Starter 

Bump. Anyone else has comments on the build quality of JH vs Earsonics? Just the aesthetics, because I believe both companies can do fantastic-sounding earphones.

post #6 of 15



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zinte View Post

Hi guys I'm looking for a custom IEM with good build quality. Having read the forums for awhile, seems like nothing can match UM for its build quality. However, I would like to consider some other options too. How is the build quality of JH audio compared to UM? Is it way inferior?

 

Anyone here owns both Earsonics and JH audio IEMs? please share if earsonics customs have similar, worse or better build quality compared to JH audio. And if im not wrong, UM definitely has better build quality than both of those? blink.gif

 

Thanks.


Keep in mind that the "finish" (lack of bubbles in the acrylic, etc.) is not at all the same as actual build quality (which directly relates to reliability of the product's audio performance). So, for example, Westone's ES5, while looking spectacular in terms of finish, has recently had some issues with drivers failing for whatever reason.

 

A few very tiny bubbles in the acrylic are meaningless. A custom with perfect finish that has audio failure isn't what you want, I hope.
 

I don't think we can say much about UM's actual build quality, same with EarSonics, only due to lack of sample size. JH and Westone have less than perfect track records, but Westone does have good customer service, JH has a more mixed record with customer service, but they seem to eventually do the right thing in almost all cases.

 

If you don't care about sound (which you probably should), the best choices are probably to go with the custom manufacturers closest to you to cut shipping times and the ones with the best customer service. Remember, fit issues can happen with any custom company and any audiologist and that means shipping back and forth, possibly several times if you're unlucky.

post #7 of 15

If you are particularly concerned with build quality, then consider the Custom Monitors company from Germany:

http://www.compact-monitors.de/cms_e/

I recently visited a dealer in Frankfurt, Germany who had demo models of the entire line of both UE and Custom Monitors IEM's. To me, the Custom Monitors IEM were clearly superior as far as quality of construction goes, flawless finish - superb cable etc. Not to say that the UE's were lacking in any way, but the CM's clearly oozed class. Mind you, these are the demo units I'm talking about. But there were a couple of customer units of the CM which were as impressive. 

The German headphone site http://www.hifi-forum.de/ has many fine threads comparing the UE/JH/CM IEM's which are worth reading, even if only through Google translate.

post #8 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunlun View Post



 


Keep in mind that the "finish" (lack of bubbles in the acrylic, etc.) is not at all the same as actual build quality (which directly relates to reliability of the product's audio performance). So, for example, Westone's ES5, while looking spectacular in terms of finish, has recently had some issues with drivers failing for whatever reason.

 

A few very tiny bubbles in the acrylic are meaningless. A custom with perfect finish that has audio failure isn't what you want, I hope.
 

I don't think we can say much about UM's actual build quality, same with EarSonics, only due to lack of sample size. JH and Westone have less than perfect track records, but Westone does have good customer service, JH has a more mixed record with customer service, but they seem to eventually do the right thing in almost all cases.

 

If you don't care about sound (which you probably should), the best choices are probably to go with the custom manufacturers closest to you to cut shipping times and the ones with the best customer service. Remember, fit issues can happen with any custom company and any audiologist and that means shipping back and forth, possibly several times if you're unlucky.


Seems like I should go for the JH audio ones, its the only custom im able to sample here. Just wondering, is the acryllic shell of the JH clean and generally high quality?

post #9 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zinte View Post




Seems like I should go for the JH audio ones, its the only custom im able to sample here. Just wondering, is the acryllic shell of the JH clean and generally high quality?

Well, you should first understand what you want. Then, you can listen and also read reviews of other customs and get a sense if that's closer to your preferences. The acrylic shells should be the same for every company that uses them. Some other companies offer silicone shells, like ACS and Sensaphonics. Future Sonics uses acrylic with a second, proprietary material inside to seat the dynamic drivers they manufacture themselves.

 

post #10 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zinte View Post

Bump. Anyone else has comments on the build quality of JH vs Earsonics? Just the aesthetics, because I believe both companies can do fantastic-sounding earphones.



I have received my JH13, and realized that left wall is a bit thin makes its edge sharp, so that when I insert it on the first time it hurts a bit. Lots of bubble inside. The divider of the  bore on the left canal was chipped when I received it, i think it's a factory defect, only the left one though, the right piece was ok. Don't know if I will return the piece to JHAudio or not, because it's already 2 months since I send the earmold, and I can't wait for another 2 months to enjoy this lovely iem.


Edited by ijohan - 3/2/12 at 12:11am
post #11 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zinte View Post


Seems like I should go for the JH audio ones, its the only custom im able to sample here. Just wondering, is the acryllic shell of the JH clean and generally high quality?



If compared to UM, then JH's work is not that good. UM works is very well done.

post #12 of 15

I gotta disagree. Tons of people are complaining about UM at the moment.

 

I think it kinda boils down to chance and who's working on your set of CIEMs. I've seen a lot of great builds from UM, but also some sloppy ones. Same goes for JH. I doubt there's any definite answer to the whole "who has the better build quality" question.

post #13 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Staal View Post

I gotta disagree. Tons of people are complaining about UM at the moment.

 

I think it kinda boils down to chance and who's working on your set of CIEMs. I've seen a lot of great builds from UM, but also some sloppy ones. Same goes for JH. I doubt there's any definite answer to the whole "who has the better build quality" question.



I see, maybe I was only looking at the demo unit, which I now realized that all demo units that I saw was built perfectly (no bubbles inside).

post #14 of 15

I'm sure when making demo units one would redo the product if it had even the slightest cosmetical issue such as bubbles.

 

 

post #15 of 15

Either way, I think every CIEM company has excellent build quality because everything is done by hand... I have seen many pictures of CIEMs from nearly every CIEM company and no company is better than the other in any way. They are look pretty flawless in their own unique way

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Build quality, UM compared to JH and Earsonics?