Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Colorfly CK4 first review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Colorfly CK4 first review - Page 9

post #121 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berkovajazz View Post

Walks with HFM801, only seen them in Google.ru:)


More like walks all over it ;).

post #122 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


More like walks all over it wink.gif.

Where do you get this information from Lee? Have you heard HFM801? O_o

Or is this just another claim to support your gonads from shrinking?
post #123 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post


Where do you get this information from Lee? Have you heard HFM801? O_o
Or is this just another claim to support your gonads from shrinking?


From various owners of both the DX100 and Hifiman 801. Actually a quite a few of those owners sold the 801 long ago. tupac still owns an 801 and is actually trading it in because he is disappointed in it in comparison to his DX100. Just no comparison. Also being a former owner of a 601 myself I could see the reason to be upset. Rolled off treble really isn't what is is cut out to be.

post #124 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


From various owners of both the DX100 and Hifiman 801. Actually a quite a few of those owners sold the 801 long ago. tupac still owns an 801 and is actually trading it in because he is disappointed in it in comparison to his DX100. Just no comparison. Also being a former owner of a 601 myself I could see the reason to be upset. Rolled off treble really isn't what is is cut out to be.

Right! So you haven't heard it. wink.gif Putting your trust in the hands of others I see...

BTW. I hope your impressions went well today. smile.gif
post #125 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post


Right! So you haven't heard it. wink.gif Putting your trust in the hands of others I see...
BTW. I hope your impressions went well today. smile.gif


lol why wouldn't I trust tupac. The Hifiman 801 was his favorite go to DAP before I recommended him the DX100. It took him sometime to warm up to the DX100 and with the firmware updates it became his go to DAP. I think that says enough. He also has some serious gear himself. Gear that I want lol (SE5, NT6).

 

The impressions went well. She cleaned my ear canals just a little bit. I didn't know my ear canals were that deep lol. It sucks holding your mouth open for 7 minutes and trying not to drool :P.


Edited by lee730 - 12/4/12 at 5:30pm
post #126 of 249

I have mix feeling..the review and multiple comments says c3 is better then ck4.. arghh should I get ck4????/

help

post #127 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfire8888 View Post

I have mix feeling..the review and multiple comments says c3 is better then ck4.. arghh should I get ck4????/
help

If you want a bigger stage, more detail and a sweeter mid range yes. The way I see it CK4+ is the better player, this is clear on first listen, it is advanced especially around the mid range, detailing and soundstage area's. What C3 has over this is a very nice presentation, using what's there to maximum potential, it is not the better SQ player but works very well how it deals with limitations. CK4+ will sound rather effortless, more power. clarity, richer, a better black space behind your music.

Basically if you did want to take the next step from C3 then CK4+ is the way to go. But if you want to save money and get the best you can the cheapest you can C3 is the better choice. CK4+ is really for those who want to milk any extra SQ they can or go to the next level.

Have a read of this, but be clear it is only "the best value for money" not the better sounding player I summed up.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/638415/colorfly-c3-vs-colorfly-ck4-comparison-true-portable-hifi-sound
Edited by H20Fidelity - 12/5/12 at 3:50pm
post #128 of 249

hi h20 thanks.. Is it true you mention the bass is better on c3 than ck4?

post #129 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfire8888 View Post

hi h20 thanks.. Is it true you mention the bass is better on c3 than ck4?


I did some testing with Sony MDR V6 (60ohm headphone) for you regarding this.

The bass on C3 slightly more in quantity, I stress 'slightly', probably about 0.5db more to my ears, but detailing on CK4+ is advanced, better clarity, better bounce, sits a touch lower in the soundstage separated well from mids. . Still very much what I call 'audiophile' bass levels though, Pretty much... if you could handle C3's bass you will be fine with CK4+. The bass reminds me of a big bubble bouncing around the lower headstage, it's very wide and lays across the stage width well. cool.gif
Edited by H20Fidelity - 12/5/12 at 4:31pm
post #130 of 249

Burn in. Does wonders doesn't it ;).
 

post #131 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post

I am kind of busy right now, so I'll just be brief.
@~ RAFA
I have said similar in my C3 vs CK4 comparison. I feel CK4+ would possibly be better suited to something with a slightly bassy signature, bring up the low end a touch. I have some el' cheapo IEM here which is warmer and performed really well. With something like V6 it was still rather plentiful in the low end though.
@~ GoodVibes.
Which Rocco do you have? Because in that review there's actually an error, the graphs with Rocco BA or incorrect, the actual review and graphing was done with Rocco S. There's small section at the beginning that explains the mix up, but it causes lots of confusion.
@~Lee
CK4+ is similar imo, the signature is a touch bright, if you use a brighter IEM the mid range becomes really potent like drinking straight whisky. Another reason something warmer may suit. It's not overly bright but shows when using a colder IEM than neutral.

I've got the -P besides the Anv 3. I was not impressed with the -P and the stock FW but an earlier model Rocoo FW made it quite good, especially if installed in a particular way. Smooth, open, detailed and not as grungy as a Sansa but lacks the dynamic tangibility of the Studio. I don't need to hear other things to understand that particular quality of the Anv 3 will be hard to top. Good for a PRAT guy. It's odd how the player can have a audible noise floor with some IEMs yet a good sense of space between notes.

 

 I had 2 RoCoos. Both good but one was a bit more special though it sits in a drawer now. I'm in the BA rotation so I'll do a compare when both are at hand. Haven't heard a Colorfly but would love to. If there's anyone in the Chicago area, would be fun to compare. I just don't understand why most of these 'audiophile' players don't have a lower output impedance. Seems most are culpable.


Edited by goodvibes - 12/5/12 at 5:33pm
post #132 of 249

For HSA fans i recommend very nice Sigmatel player Cube C60. Super device.

post #133 of 249

Lee 730, i remember that you are still in love with IE 80. Colorfly CK4+ sound very very good with Sennheiser IE.
 

post #134 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berkovajazz View Post

For HSA fans i recommend very nice Sigmatel player Cube C60. Super device.

No card slot.

 

So, the RoCoo BA showed up. Listened for a couple of minutes after dumping the system file and putting in my card. I can see why Lee likes the D FW. Better than -P this way but no ANV 3. My -P isn't that far off but clearly different and got too dry with the dynamic FW. Where the BA isn't as note full as the Anv 3 the -P has a bit extra fill as is. Back to Collorfly.bigsmile_face.gif


Edited by goodvibes - 12/6/12 at 8:19am
post #135 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berkovajazz View Post

Lee 730, i remember that you are still in love with IE 80. Colorfly CK4+ sound very very good with Sennheiser IE.
 

 

I can only confirm.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Colorfly CK4 first review