Hifiman RE272 top of the line IEM Loaner program - Page 5

Quote:

Originally Posted by DialMforMatt 

 

Received them about a week ago. I will be shipping them tomorrow to Poetik. I've spent a bit of time with them. 

I've been using a mixture of sansa clip+, clip+ with PA2v2, and computers. As far as amped vs. unamped, I believe they do sound better with it, but I honestly can't say if that "last 5%" is just in my head or not with these phones.

 

I gotta say I feel like this product almost lacks an identity. It seems the only way you can easily tell them apart from the re-262's is by the "272" labeled on them. The box it comes in, the accessories, and the design of the IEMs are all identical to the re-262. And honestly the sound, to me anyways, doesn't sound very different from the 262 either. The difference is there, but it seems for their new "flagship" they might have changed a few things up and given it it's own identity. It seems most people feel these are a slightly better re-262, but a whole lot more expensive (in comparison anyway,) and I agree. 

 

It seems like a lot of the reviews have been mostly middle of the road with a mix of negative. The only real higher-end IEMs I have to compare them to are the re-zero, re0, and re-262. Keep that in mind when I say these are fantastic headphones. They are all about the details, and I'm a nut for details. I am as interested in everything happening in the background as I am the foreground. Vocals are beautiful on them, as well as most instruments. They're a lot more focused on the highs than the mids like the re-262. The only real downfall for them is the same downfall for all hifiman IEMs, the bass. It's not bad, it's never been BAD, It's just not as good as the mids and highs, and you really only notice it on songs that are defined by the bass. Let me put it this way, you can HEAR the bass and it's accurate and whatnot, but I don't FEEL it. 

 

I can definitely understand people who think they are TOO "clean" or analytical. I think these were made for laying down in the dark and listening to them, if you're not giving them 100% of your attention you kind of forget they're on your head, and it turns from music to just noise. However if you are focused on the music they are pretty much awesome.

 

If these were $150 right next to the re-262's, I'd probably pick these, but they aren't. They're $100 more and I'm not sure exactly why. Same case, same design, same accessories, slightly better sound (to me anyways.) I think $175 would be a great price for them. If I simply bought these I think I'd feel a little bit cheated at $250. Bottom line, fantastic IEMs, but not worth the $$ over re-262.

Well, 272 has a low impedance. If it can perform unamped the same as 262 amped, then it is a winner. 

For whom my friend? No 2 listeners share the exact same values/opinions, so I'm sure just as there are two sides to every coin, there'll be those that find it well within justification, and those not so much.

^100% agree.

No, no! My mistake; I misread your statement.  I wasn't speaking strictly in regards to the difference in impedance between the two. The two sound very different, which is what I was leaning towards. If they shared sonic similarties, then I too would have a hard time believing one would pay the premium merely for less impedance, but considering the bigger picture, in that they sound noticeably different from one another, quite literally moving from warm & sweet to bright (in direct comparison that is), I could certainly see preference come into play, where some would be inclined towards the 262, while others toward the 272, in which case the premium may very well be worth it to the latter.

wrong post modified

Quote:

Originally Posted by baka1969 



Would that justify the premium?

Then you need to compare it with other low impedance phone, e.g. ER4P.

Obviously, 272 is a replacement of 252 not 262. But is it really $50 better than 252??

Quote:

Originally Posted by umvue 

Then you need to compare it with other low impedance phone, e.g. ER4P.

 

Obviously, 272 is a replacement of 252 not 262. But is it really $50 better than 252??

I just departed with ER-4PT and I'll have RE0, RE252 and RE272 within a few days, what exactly is it you'd like to know?

Quote:

Originally Posted by umvue 

Obviously, 272 is a replacement of 252 not 262. But is it really $50 better than 252??

I don't even consider RE272 to be a replacement of RE252. They occupy different space as far as sound signature go. If anything, RE272 is more in line with ER4 type of sound.

How does it compare to TWFK like sound?

TWFK? You means like DBA-02 / B2's sound? That are IEM that uses TWFK and they don't sound alike (i.e. q-JAYS) so I am not sure what TWFK should sound like. But on DBA-02 / B2 alone, I'll say as analytical IEM, both RE272 and ER4 are better than DBA-02 / B2. While DBA-02 / B2 has more sparkle, the overall presentation is raw and busy, which results in detail lost.

Hi Tai,

Yes, by TWFK I mean DBA-02, B2, q-Jays, CK10, UE700 etc.

I think they all have a fairly similiar presentation, I haven't heard the first 2 on that list.

________

So.. you think Ety ER-4 and RE272 have the highest detail of IEM's? or just highest clarity..?

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki 

Hi Tai,

 

Yes, by TWFK I mean DBA-02, B2, q-Jays, CK10, UE700 etc.

 

I think they all have a fairly similiar presentation, I haven't heard the first 2 on that list.

________

 

So.. you think Ety ER-4 and RE272 have the highest detail of IEM's? or just highest clarity..?

 

 

Clarity and detail go hand in hand. You can't be detailed without a good clarity. IEM like DBA-02/ B2 (or even some of FAD model) might able to push more information out, but they are raw and busy. Instead of able to listen to the individual notes, everything get drown out by the excessive amount of information - those are not what I call detail, more like noise. With RE272, especially when balanced amped, I'll say it is a tad better than a well amped ER4S on presenting detail. These are by far the most detailed sounding IEM I have heard. Of course I haven't heard any of the good Audio Technica so I don't know how they go.

For me, detail and clarity are different.

To keep it basic:

Clarity - shimmer, sparkle, air, bell-like quality, shimmering, realism, life-like, serene, and so on.

Detail - information, raw data, replication of the recording, fine microdetail of an instrument, presence of an intrument (or synthetic sound).

For me, the ER-4S had very high detail, but what the CK10 and UE700 do better is imaging and layering, it divides the details into different pathways so I can hear them more clearly, on the ER-4S there's a high level of detail coming from the same direction, with fairly low imaging and layering.  Perhaps this is why I don't understand "coherency", because I don't really look for it, I prefer the imaging and seperated pathways, even if this is an artificial feature (but so is 5 speakers and a sub-woofer in a living room).