Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › It's Like UNIVERSAL IEM Deja vu!!! Journey into universal IEMs when I thought I was done...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

It's Like UNIVERSAL IEM Deja vu!!! Journey into universal IEMs when I thought I was done... - Page 9

post #121 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Varley View Post

Does anyone else where the TF10's in opposite ears with the cables switched?

Yes, I wear them with the flip mod. There's a lot of conversation on this over on the TF10 Appreciation Thread
post #122 of 155
Thread Starter 

I'm finding that I'm liking the Senn. double-flange from the IE8 (large) on these TF10s. Nice bass and a wider soundstage. Nice through the E10/E9 DAC/amp combo. I don't understand the flip mod. Can someone explain that better to me, please?

 

 

Just A/Bed the TF10 against the SM2. I'm using the Sen double -flange on the UE and the medium thick oval Westone (W4) silicon on the Earsonics. Overall (to my great surprise) the TF10 won. I listened to one jazz instrumental with strings (Baroque Steps by trumpeter Tom Harrell) and one pop song with vocal (This Guy's in Love With You by Herb Alpert & The Tijuana Brass)

The TF10 overall had a fuller body and greater instrument separation (now this is through the Fiio E10/E9 DAC-amp combo. I'm still using the standard cable but I was really pleasantly surprised how full the TF10 came across - especially on the instrumental jazz track. On the other hand, the SM2 wins with better mids and better sounding vocals, but the TF10 definitely had more detail overall sound - especially in the bass and treble. Vocals are decent in the TF10, but a bit cold sounding for my taste. And while the SM2 sounds a bit warmer than the TF10, it's not by that much. The SM2 has decent bass, but it's more mid-centric. Now, for the first time, I'm about to see how the 1964-Q gets along with my E10/E9 combo.

Oh, if the TF10 gets quite better from here with an upgrade cable, well we're at an excellent starting point....


Edited by ericp10 - 12/3/11 at 3:46pm
post #123 of 155

Basically, - You just wear them over the ear but the right piece in the left ear and so on...You swap the cables so sound from the channels doesn't change with the music

post #124 of 155

It's quite simple. Reverse the cable orientation, so that the L cable is now in the right earpiece, and the R cable is now in the left ear piece. Then wear the TF10 in the reverse orientation, as in the left ear piece (which is now connected to the R cable) is worn on the right side, and the right ear piece (which is now connected to the L cable) is worn on the left side. And voila! You have the flip-flop mod. smile.gif

post #125 of 155
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Varley View Post

Basically, - You just wear them over the ear but the right piece in the left ear and so on...You swap the cables so sound from the channels doesn't change with the music



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by i2ehan View Post

It's quite simple. Reverse the cable orientation, so that the L cable is now in the right earpiece, and the R cable is now in the left ear piece. Then wear the TF10 in the reverse orientation, as in the left ear piece (which is now connected to the R cable) is worn on the right side, and the right ear piece (which is now connected to the L cable) is worn on the left side. And voila! You have the flip-flop mod. smile.gif



Okay guys, and what is this suppose to achieve? Does it make the sound better somehow?

post #126 of 155

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

Okay guys, and what is this suppose to achieve? Does it make the sound better somehow?


For most, it significantly improves fit/comfort.

post #127 of 155

For some it improveds comfort, but it actually has an effect on soundstage (though this latter point is rarely mentioned). JH tuned it to sound with the standard fit, so the flip flip mod may change things negatively. 

post #128 of 155
Thread Starter 

Thanks guys for the info... I think I'll leave as is....

 

As for the 1964-Q (no surprises),  it still rules in my ears as the IEM with the most weight, instrument separation, clarity, transparency and best bass/sub bass. It's the most dynamic sounding BA IEM I own.

post #129 of 155

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

Thanks guys for the info... I think I'll leave as is....

 

As for the 1964-Q (no surprises),  it still rules in my ears as the IEM with the most weight, instrument separation, clarity, transparency and best bass/sub bass. It's the most dynamic sounding BA IEM I own.


For me, the FX700 reigns supreme, as far as universals are concerned. No matter which in-ear I'm coming from, be it any other top-tier (W4, SE535, etc.), the FX700 never ceases to impress me. biggrin.gif

post #130 of 155
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by i2ehan View Post

Quote:


For me, the FX700 reigns supreme, as far as universals are concerned. No matter which in-ear I'm coming from, be it any other top-tier (W4, SE535, etc.), the FX700 never ceases to impress me. biggrin.gif



I really can't say anything negative about the FX700. I wish the mids were more forward, but that's not a negative. It's still one of my favorite universal IEMs of all time (although I really don't miss it because the Quad and the FXT90 are filling in the void nicely)...beerchug.gif

post #131 of 155

That's weird. You'd think it would be the same just reversed.blink.gif
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

For some it improveds comfort, but it actually has an effect on soundstage (though this latter point is rarely mentioned). JH tuned it to sound with the standard fit, so the flip flip mod may change things negatively. 



 

post #132 of 155

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inks View Post

For some it improveds comfort, but it actually has an effect on soundstage (though this latter point is rarely mentioned). JH tuned it to sound with the standard fit, so the flip flip mod may change things negatively. 


Inks, if 'm not mistaken, the TF10 sounds just as you've mentioned it, but only when the polarity is reversed (when the L and R on either cable are facing opposite directions with respect to one another), and not when simply wearing it in the reversed orientation. As our friend Selenium pointed out, merely wearing them in the opposite orientation didn't alter the soundstage for me, but when I accidently switched polarity, the soundstage was noticeably compromised.

post #133 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

For some it improveds comfort, but it actually has an effect on soundstage (though this latter point is rarely mentioned). JH tuned it to sound with the standard fit, so the flip flip mod may change things negatively.
 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Selenium View Post

That's weird. You'd think it would be the same just reversed.blink.gif


Can't speak for the TF10, but I definitely noticed that effect with my SF5 Pros back then. Polarity was fine, but the flip mod would change the angle between earpieces and ear canal and result in a narrower soundstage.

post #134 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post


Can't speak for the TF10, but I definitely noticed that effect with my SF5 Pros back then. Polarity was fine, but the flip mod would change the angle between earpieces and ear canal and result in a narrower soundstage.



Same here with the UEs I tried it with.

 

post #135 of 155

I'll add my experience. Works well with the single bore SF 3 but not with any of the dual bores. Same with the latest TF 10. Started flip side but ended up back normal style.

 

As for polarity there is usually an audible sign of correct and incorrect. With the Silver Ray it is a narrower stage with a less open sound. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › It's Like UNIVERSAL IEM Deja vu!!! Journey into universal IEMs when I thought I was done...