Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi-Custom In-Ear Monitor Review, Resource, Mfg List & Discussion (Check first post for review links & information)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Multi-Custom In-Ear Monitor Review, Resource, Mfg List & Discussion (Check first post for review... - Page 213

post #3181 of 3975
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidcotton View Post

HALF A SHELL'S BETTER THAN NONE :-

 

MINERVA MI 1 HALF SHELL (full shell available on request)

 

 

 

 

 

Picture courtesy of Minerva and tomscy2000 (couldn't take a picture that good if I tried).  Mine look like that.  Flawless shells, no bubbles and a decent fit.  That's a first for me as I usually struggle, maybe my ears just prefer silicone to acryllic?  Even funnier is that my normally troublesome right ear gets a perfect fit straight away and the left ear I have to play with a little bit but still get it.  Sound for  a single driver is perfectly acceptable and whilst it won't win any awards for sound for a good comfortable well isolating fairly cheap ciem in the uk (£195, minus a £10 if they have impressions on file) it's worth considering.  It's interesting to see how it's evolved over 3 or so years as you can see from this old website article photo http://www.minerva-hearingprotection.co.uk/review-minerva-mi-1-custom-headphones-that-don-t-break-the-bank.html

 

I was glad I had them today as my machine at work decided to develop a bit of a fault and was making a hell of a racket.  Popped these in, shoved a bit of Magnum's on The Thirteenth Day (check these guys out if you are in to rock in anyway) and it was a question of what noise? 

 

I've had a couple of issues with Minerva (all sorted amicably at the time it has to be said) and I still don't like the way they charge for things most other companies do for standard (£10 extra for a black colour? Come off it!) but on the basis of this transaction I wish them well.  I am interested in the pro but after the issues I had last time (3 fittings couldn't get my left ear correct) I wasn't willing to risk it.

 

 

Minerva aren't the only ones who do a half shell ciem as I've mentioned these guys before.

 

 

COSMIC EAR's MA1 with sansa clip plus, CIEM goodness for £130 (plus cost for card, postage and impressions so under £200) what's not to like?

 

For comparison from earlier in the thread a shot of my Cosmic Ears MA1's  :-

 

 

So you can see the obvious similarities.  As I use these at work I prefer this style of customs as they are a lot less unobtrusive and sit flush in the ear much more naturally whilst isolating much better than the universals.  I do prefer the way minerva have done the cabling to cosmic as I had issues with CE's strain relief (now sorted and quick too!) pressing against my right ear preventing fit, apparantly (as per usual!) they had never had that issue before!   Cosmic Ears also do a dual ba version with a bit more bass called the MA2 the new version of which (both MA1 and 2) will come with detachable cables.

 

 

Cheers

 

 

Thanks for sharing, there are so many options out there these days.  It makes me miss my SA-12, which is another canal only CIEM.  They are very nice and unobtrusive for sure.  

post #3182 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviltooth View Post  Can you compare the CA and minerva single drivers based on sound quality?

 

I don't think he's able to. He only ordered the Minerva.

 

From a theoretical standpoint, they should be very similar, though they have their differences (talking about comparing the Minerva Performer/Mi-1 and the CA Pro100; the CA Music One should have a different sound profile, though still similar). I'm not going to say which is "better", because they're much more similar than they are not, and should have comparable THD+N profiles and CSD profiles such that the sound signature and amount of detail is more similar than not.

 

Here's what they have in common:

  • Same Acoustic Damper (Green, 1680 ohm)
  • Same Cable (from Colsan)
  • Same Driver Family (Sonion 23XX, but depending on the type of driver, may constitute slight sound differences; it's more likely than not that that they share the same 2356, though, as using a 2323, 2389, or 2354 would be silly with their 10 ohm impedance @1k)

 

Here's where they differ:

 

Minerva uses a C-Grid wax guard; they claim it is acoustically neutral and it very well may be, but there's an implication to this feature, which is that the C-Grid requires the use of 1.47mm tubing, while the CA Pro100 uses 2.0 mm tubing (correct me if I'm wrong, Peter). Acoustically, it'll be different because of different tubing diameters.

 

Here's an example of how tubing diameter might affect FR (not the FR of the drivers in question but rather the 1723WT03 used in the Performer Pro, but the general principle is the same):

 

 

The following is a textual description from Sonion:

 

Adjusting Tubing Diameter:
The diameter of the tube can be used to adjust the high frequency balance of the module. It is important to choose the inner diameter of the tubing larger; as small diameters will function as an acoustic low pass filter. In general, diameters below 1.5 mm should be avoided. Shown below in figure 6 are the affects of varying the tubing diameter. Length is kept constant at 12 mm and without any damping.

 

The second difference is that the tubing length (talking about the distance from damper to opening), from these pictures and eyeballing an estimation, seems slightly shorter (can't tell how much shorter) in the Minerva than the Pro100 that I have.

 

 

Here's what Sonion has to say about tube length adjustments:

 

Adjusting Tubing Length:
The length of the tubing can be adjusted to obtain a balanced distribution of the acoustic peaks. Tubing length greatly affects the frequency response of the receiver module in the application and can lead to an uneven distribution with undesirable deep valleys between the peaks. The end result is missing high frequencies. Figure 5 shows the affect of changing the length of a 2.0 mm ID. un-damped tube.

 

The last difference is that the CA Pro100 has a small horn-shaped tip, while the Minerva and its wax guard don't have a horn design. This may not be a huge difference for many people, as a horn of this size mostly bolsters the highest of frequencies, but may help those with very good treble-extended hearing.

 

Overall, my best guess would be that the Minerva has a slightly smoother, warmer sound signature than the Pro100, but really, they should be similar enough that it's just a matter of taste.


Edited by tomscy2000 - 7/11/13 at 11:40pm
post #3183 of 3975

Whoops!  Thank-you, Tomscy2000.  Your message was chock full of interesting thoughts, graphs and details..  However it was a response to my screwing up CE and CA.  I was asking how the CE MA1 (Cosmic Ears) compared to Minerva's effort as Davidcotton appears to have both.

 

At the moment Custom Art appears to offer the best value for silicone based CIEM.  I hope my upcoming Pro330 impress like their single driver models have.

post #3184 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviltooth View Post

Whoops!  Thank-you, Tomscy2000.  Your message was chock full of interesting thoughts, graphs and details..  However it was a response to my screwing up CE and CA.  I was asking how the CE MA1 (Cosmic Ears) compared to Minerva's effort as Davidcotton appears to have both.

 

At the moment Custom Art appears to offer the best value for silicone based CIEM.  I hope my upcoming Pro330 impress like their single driver models have.

 

You made me do ALL THAT WORK for NOTHING?!? mad.gif

 

tongue.gif J/K... Hopefully, it's helpful for people who want to know why tubing has just as much to do with the sound signature of a CIEM as the drivers do.

 

It'll also be helpful for davidcotton if he's really considering the Performer Pro. It uses the 1723WT03, which has the FR shown in those graphs. Since, from pictures, we know it also uses a green damper, we can make a best guess approximation as to how it looks (green trace):

 

 

Note that the tubing effects of the previous post still apply, so the peak at 4.5k will be lower, and the null at 7.5k will be a little deeper than shown because Minerva uses a 1.5mm tube ID, and that this is the vented response, so the bass should be about 3 dB lower.

post #3185 of 3975
Hi I'll get round to doing a comparison with the mi and ma when I get the ma's back from a cable repair. It was the fact that they would be gone at least another two weeks that prompted me to get the mi's in the first place! I will say that both sets are a safe bet so long as you realise that it won't be the be all and end all but as a good cheap way to get into customs then both are well worth investigating. You shouldn't be offended by either pairs sound, though if you want more bass then obviously go for the cosmics ma2 model when it's re released. The other decision of course is price. Minerva mi is £195 (but will knock £10 off if impressions on file) Cosmic ma1 was £100 and the ma2 was £150 but I think both are under change so take that with a pinch of salt. The other factor is silicone vs acryllic. Hope that helps!
post #3186 of 3975

Nice informative post Tom.

 

Pro100 uses 2mm ID tubing but Minerva does as well. SSD have 2mm outside diameter. There are other third-party C-grids which may suit such tubing easily.

 

Quote:
 the CA Music One should have a different sound profile, though still similar

nah, there are hardly any similarities between Music One and Pro100. Starting from basic frequency response, ending with soundstage, imaging and overall character.

post #3187 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by piotrus-g View Post  Nice informative post Tom.

 

Pro100 uses 2mm ID tubing but Minerva does as well. SSD have 2mm outside diameter. There are other third-party C-grids which may suit such tubing easily.

 

nah, there are hardly any similarities between Music One and Pro100. Starting from basic frequency response, ending with soundstage, imaging and overall character.


Thanks for the clarification; looks like they'll really sound fairly similar, then. Their implementation of the C-Grid still looks funky to me, why is the inner stem so thin compared to the sound tube?

post #3188 of 3975

Wait, there is more to a CIEM than driver count?!?!? Are you guys sure?????? 

post #3189 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by project86 View Post

Wait, there is more to a CIEM than driver count?!?!? Are you guys sure?????? 

 

 

WHOA!!

 

Now don't get carried away! I'm sure that's nothing more than an unfounded rumour.

 

Everyone knows that more drivers is always better, and that Santa really exists!

post #3190 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by project86 View Post  Wait, there is more to a CIEM than driver count?!?!? Are you guys sure?????? 


And price too! The only two things that matter! wink.gif

post #3191 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post


And price too! The only two things that matter! wink.gif

 

Actually, I have it on good authority that a pretentious-sounding name can have a huge impact on the performance of a CIEM, too.

post #3192 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post

 

Actually, I have it on good authority that a pretentious-sounding name can have a huge impact on the performance of a CIEM, too.


Define pretentious.  I actually prefer a CIEM to have a name like Merlin as opposed to a single letter or number 'code'.  Sometimes when I'm reading messages from some users I become confused by which product is being referenced because many of the 'codes' are painfully similar (and yes I understand that it's often related to driver count et al).

post #3193 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviltooth View Post


Define pretentious.  I actually prefer a CIEM to have a name like Merlin as opposed to a single letter or number 'code'.  Sometimes when I'm reading messages from some users I become confused by which product is being referenced because many of the 'codes' are painfully similar (and yes I understand that it's often related to driver count et al).

 

LOL! Relax, mate, I wasn't being serious about it  (although I have been serious in relation to the AK100 / AK120  wink.gif)

post #3194 of 3975
Thread Starter 

Another amp review posted...the Ortofon MHd-Q7.

post #3195 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

 

You made me do ALL THAT WORK for NOTHING?!? mad.gif

 

tongue.gif J/K... Hopefully, it's helpful for people who want to know why tubing has just as much to do with the sound signature of a CIEM as the drivers do.

 

It'll also be helpful for davidcotton if he's really considering the Performer Pro. It uses the 1723WT03, which has the FR shown in those graphs. Since, from pictures, we know it also uses a green damper, we can make a best guess approximation as to how it looks (green trace):

 

 

A very interesting and insightful post, Tomscy2000. Info like that is food for laymens such as I. Thank you.

 

And another thorough amp review Average_Joe, thanks. Seems Ortofon are onto a winner, here. Shame about the hiss!     


Edited by Nulliverse - 7/15/13 at 6:19am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi-Custom In-Ear Monitor Review, Resource, Mfg List & Discussion (Check first post for review links & information)