or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

TDK BA200 Thread - Page 84

post #1246 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marleybob217 View Post
 

I don't think I've ever owned one. But the BA200 works really well, with any genre really. But you do need silicone tips for the best sound. The downside of this, is that you do lose out on some isolation.

 

But it might be due to the strange shape of my ear canal, that demands silicone tips.

Thanks for help. I think I will go with ba200. The only thing I was really worried about was treble. If you like metal with ba200 than I think ba200's treble response is enough for me.

post #1247 of 1504

For my taste the BA 200 lacked treble quantity and extension, especially for rock and metall.

post #1248 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaffeemann View Post
 

For my taste the BA 200 lacked treble quantity and extension, especially for rock and metall.

Did you use silicone tips?

post #1249 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marleybob217 View Post
 

Did you use silicone tips?

Oh, about treble extension and IEMS. Even my quad-driver cIEMs lack treble extension... I sure hope the 6 BA version fixes this.

post #1250 of 1504
Some call ba200's treble smooth, some say recessed. So now I just can't imagine how much quantity it carries. If measured from 1 to 10, how much would you rate ba200's treble. Let's imagine 11 would start to sound harsh and 10 is the maximum acceptable quantity, 0 is the minimum acceptable. please rate whoever can. thanks.
Edited by AzatHead-Fier - 11/24/13 at 4:08pm
post #1251 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marleybob217 View Post
 

Oh, about treble extension and IEMS. Even my quad-driver cIEMs lack treble extension... I sure hope the 6 BA version fixes this.

More drivers doesn't mean better treble extension. Depends how they implement them, and what kind of drivers they use.

And of course, the way the company wants to tune them. I'd imagine CIEMs tend to want to avoid harsh trebles. Well... not always the case.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzatHead-Fier View Post

Some call ba200's treble smooth, some say recessed. So now I just can't imagine how much quantity it carries. If measured from 1 to 10, how much would you rate ba200's treble. Let's imagine 11 would start to sound harsh and 10 is the maximum acceptable quantity, 0 is the minimum acceptable. please rate whoever can. thanks.

I won't rate it with a clear number, since I don't listen to metal.

 

The BA200 could certainly use a bit more treble extension and clarity (little to do with the extension part btw).

They're not analytical but they also do not induce fatigue nor cause sibilance.

Though compared to MANY other IEMs the trebles aren't considered bad either. They're not outright lacking, they're not metallic sounding, but they're not sparkly (often attributed with a spike or bump in the upper regions of the FR) per say either.

They'd probably enter the ranges of 6~8. It also depends on personal tastes.

post #1252 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalbee View Post
 

More drivers doesn't mean better treble extension. Depends how they implement them, and what kind of drivers they use.

And of course, the way the company wants to tune them. I'd imagine CIEMs tend to want to avoid harsh trebles. Well... not always the case.

 

I won't rate it with a clear number, since I don't listen to metal.

 

The BA200 could certainly use a bit more treble extension and clarity (little to do with the extension part btw).

They're not analytical but they also do not induce fatigue nor cause sibilance.

Though compared to MANY other IEMs the trebles aren't considered bad either. They're not outright lacking, they're not metallic sounding, but they're not sparkly (often attributed with a spike or bump in the upper regions of the FR) per say either.

They'd probably enter the ranges of 6~8. It also depends on personal tastes.

Good! I am not a fan of sparkly treble. And if there is no lack of certain amount so that to be called recessed than I will be satisfied. Thanks.

post #1253 of 1504

Yes, I used the silicon tips and very deep insertion. I'm not a fan of bright IEMs either, but the BA200 was lackluster in the treble department.

post #1254 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaffeemann View Post
 

Yes, I used the silicon tips and very deep insertion. I'm not a fan of bright IEMs either, but the BA200 was lackluster in the treble department.

Actually, I'm not sure if all silicone tips would give you good treble. The ones I use are the shure soft flex sleeves. But I increased the diameter of the bore of these tips, and also made the stem a bit shorter. I think the length of the provided tips, and the smaller diameter of the bore and stem are decreasing your treble.

 

It's very well known that increasing the bore size (sometimes revered to as horning) will increase the treble response. Just like any tweeter of a speaker is placed in a horn.

post #1255 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzatHead-Fier View Post

Some call ba200's treble smooth, some say recessed. So now I just can't imagine how much quantity it carries. If measured from 1 to 10, how much would you rate ba200's treble. Let's imagine 11 would start to sound harsh and 10 is the maximum acceptable quantity, 0 is the minimum acceptable. please rate whoever can. thanks.


I would say about 5-6.  It's very clear and not siblant, but it's not hyper extended or detailed like the Rockit R50.  To me, the TDK BA200 sounds more like a very clear dynamic driver than a BA based iem (which I like).  It's very musical and enjoyable with great clarity.


Edited by jbsteeves - 11/25/13 at 3:06pm
post #1256 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzatHead-Fier View Post
 

Good! I am not a fan of sparkly treble. And if there is no lack of certain amount so that to be called recessed than I will be satisfied. Thanks.

Well, I meant no notable lack of certain parts of the upper-mids and treble. This does not include the concept of extension. I don't really hear past 16.5kHz anyway.

That said, a lot of headphones/earphones sound like they have better treble extension due to a spike taller than the 1kHz reference point.

In any case, if you don't insert them fully you'll hear another flaw of the treble region more clearly: these are far from the last word on clarity.

 

Take the words of the others at heart; these are definitely not known for their treble.

I'm also more used to dark signatures than most other people.

 

If you want more treble presence you'd probably want to EQ it.

It does make things sound clearer and more energetic to the otherwise kind of laid back and relaxed sound:

 

That's the EQ I use on the go (bus/metro/etc.), but Denon audio player (iOS app as seen above) doesn't exactly let you have very precise EQ settings. Rather, touch screens don't give you the fine tuning ability. Kind of doubt the accuracy of this app's EQ but it does somewhat work when exaggerating the boosts in dB. With the stock silicone tips.

 

The BA200's weakness is namely in the extension. The strength in it's somewhat smoothness in sound. Clarity/detail leaves much to desire if you're heard better gears or just had a generally brighter IEM before. (My Kenwood KH-C701 totally destroy the BA200 in terms of clarity and detail, for example).

 

Give it a bit of a V-shaped EQ curve and you can improve things around. The sub bass can come as weak without EQ.

You can probably simply use a straight sloped line from 1kHz upwards. Depends on your tastes and music and their recording.

I don't use this EQ in quiet places though, it gets fatiguing. It's more for use on bus/metro/etc.

 

(P.S. to get proper bass you'd also have to get a GOOD seal on them. Sometimes I need to push the IEMs into my ears a little more, despite being practically fully inserted already).


Edited by kalbee - 11/25/13 at 6:51pm
post #1257 of 1504

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalbee View Post
 

Well, I meant no notable lack of certain parts of the upper-mids and treble. This does not include the concept of extension. I don't really hear past 16.5kHz anyway.

That said, a lot of headphones/earphones sound like they have better treble extension due to a spike taller than the 1kHz reference point.

In any case, if you don't insert them fully you'll hear another flaw of the treble region more clearly: these are far from the last word on clarity.

I remember hf5 didn't have as high extension as dba-02. The brightest sparkle, and the very top of cymbals' ringing was absent. But treble of hf5 was more musical, not fatiguing. If ba200 doesn't lose rather big amount of details in treble, I can go with it. When EQing with Brainwavz R1 I fully drop down 16kHz region and 8kHz region by half. It is impossible to listen to metal with that kind of treble for a long time (I mean half an hour and more). Before I liked the aggressive kind of treble, but it causes lost details in midrange and shortens soundstage depth. These are my subjective impressions.

Now I know that ba200's treble is nowhere near to fxt90 and dba-02.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalbee View Post

 

The BA200's weakness is namely in the extension. The strength in it's somewhat smoothness in sound. Clarity/detail leaves much to desire if you're heard better gears or just had a generally brighter IEM before. (My Kenwood KH-C701 totally destroy the BA200 in terms of clarity and detail, for example).

I wouldn't say that if an IEM is brighter than it carries better details and clarity. JVC FXT90 is a dark sounding IEM, but it has rather good amount of details and clarity as well. You think ba200's clarity isn't good because of its treble response and extension?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kalbee View Post

 

Give it a bit of a V-shaped EQ curve and you can improve things around.

I want such an IEM that I wouldn't use EQ with it. From the graph I see that sub-bass is really weak if you pumped it up like that. :(

 

The most important thing for me are clear, transparent and detailed midrange accompanied by calm (but not absent) treble and bass.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbsteeves View Post
 


I would say about 5-6.  It's very clear and not siblant, but it's not hyper extended or detailed like the Rockit R50.  To me, the TDK BA200 sounds more like a very clear dynamic driver than a BA based iem (which I like).  It's very musical and enjoyable with great clarity.

 

Thanks. Do you think that clarity is better than other BA earphones' you have heard?

post #1258 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzatHead-Fier View Post
 

Quote:

I remember hf5 didn't have as high extension as dba-02. The brightest sparkle, and the very top of cymbals' ringing was absent. But treble of hf5 was more musical, not fatiguing. If ba200 doesn't lose rather big amount of details in treble, I can go with it. When EQing with Brainwavz R1 I fully drop down 16kHz region and 8kHz region by half. It is impossible to listen to metal with that kind of treble for a long time (I mean half an hour and more). Before I liked the aggressive kind of treble, but it causes lost details in midrange and shortens soundstage depth. These are my subjective impressions.

Now I know that ba200's treble is nowhere near to fxt90 and dba-02.

I wouldn't say that if an IEM is brighter than it carries better details and clarity. JVC FXT90 is a dark sounding IEM, but it has rather good amount of details and clarity as well. You think ba200's clarity isn't good because of its treble response and extension?

 

I want such an IEM that I wouldn't use EQ with it. From the graph I see that sub-bass is really weak if you pumped it up like that. :(

 

The most important thing for me are clear, transparent and detailed midrange accompanied by calm (but not absent) treble and bass.

I liked the hf5 from the short demo I made... I recall the extension (or sort of lack of) was pretty apparent though. The BA200 probably has a little more extension than those---or within comparable means. With the silicone tips anyway.

 

You're definitely right on bright != clarity. The effective range is close to one another to some extent of overlapping so I colluded them together. If we refer to the graph on post #1 (assuming it's accurate) we can see that it does take a dip from 4kHz to 6kHz. As far as extension goes, yes, at times you feel that it might go into the slightly duller/flatter-sounding side of the spectrum. Depends on the music type & personal preference ofc. That is my current problem with my "reference" headphone too (it's flat for most part, but it's also dark sounding).

 

Most of the time I don't use EQ with them. As I mentioned, those settings are what I sometimes use on the go (bus/metro/etc.) where sub bass is generally otherwise drowned out, like it or not. The boost is pretty high and that EQ setting gives me headaches when I'm in a more quiet place. And like I said, I do doubt the effectiveness/accuracy of this EQ app. That's around +3.5dB ~ +4.0dB in the sub bass, by the way, and is roughly tuned by ear while in bus/metro. It only reflects my preferences in those situations for the specific playlist I use with this app, not necessarily to obtain a flat FR.

 

That said, I don't experience too much sub bass on normal use w/o EQ. As you may know, bass is dependent on your fit/seal. I am slightly in between sizes of the two dual flange tips so that may be the reason why my perceived sub bass isn't very loud. In any case, say I were to DIY something up with my BA200 drivers (which I will eventually be doing), I wouldn't be adding a bass driver but a tweeter or etc. that focuses more on upper/high mids. My subjective view on the extensions is that they're good enough, but I want more clarity. That's kind of what trying CIEM flagships do to you... this is still what I ended up with :D 

 

That said, I won't go into whether I think you should get these or not... I'm just laying out how my experience with them sounds like.


Edited by kalbee - 11/26/13 at 1:51pm
post #1259 of 1504
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalbee View Post
 

I liked the hf5 from the short demo I made... I recall the extension (or sort of lack of) was pretty apparent though. The BA200 probably has a little more extension than those---or within comparable means. With the silicone tips anyway.

 

You're definitely right on bright != clarity. The effective range is close to one another to some extent of overlapping so I colluded them together. If we refer to the graph on post #1 (assuming it's accurate) we can see that it does take a dip from 4kHz to 6kHz. As far as extension goes, yes, at times you feel that it might go into the slightly duller/flatter-sounding side of the spectrum. Depends on the music type & personal preference ofc. That is my current problem with my "reference" headphone too (it's flat for most part, but it's also dark sounding).

 

Most of the time I don't use EQ with them. As I mentioned, those settings are what I sometimes use on the go (bus/metro/etc.) where sub bass is generally otherwise drowned out, like it or not. The boost is pretty high and that EQ setting gives me headaches when I'm in a more quiet place. And like I said, I do doubt the effectiveness/accuracy of this EQ app. That's around +3.5dB ~ +4.0dB in the sub bass, by the way, and is roughly tuned by ear while in bus/metro. It only reflects my preferences in those situations for the specific playlist I use with this app, not necessarily to obtain a flat FR.

 

That said, I don't experience too much sub bass on normal use w/o EQ. As you may know, bass is dependent on your fit/seal. I am slightly in between sizes of the two dual flange tips so that may be the reason why my perceived sub bass isn't very loud. In any case, say I were to DIY something up with my BA200 drivers (which I will eventually be doing), I wouldn't be adding a bass driver but a tweeter or etc. that focuses more on upper/high mids. My subjective view on the extensions is that they're good enough, but I want more clarity. That's kind of what trying CIEM flagships do to you... this is still what I ended up with :D 

 

That said, I won't go into whether I think you should get these or not... I'm just laying out how my experience with them sounds like.

I started with a dark sounding IEM (ViSang VS-R02, which I own till now). Than I switched to brighter sets. It seems like bright IEMs insist on me listening to the sound they produce. Now I am sure that dark sounding IEMs with calm signature fit my preferences better. I have decided to buy ba200.

 

Thanks for help.

post #1260 of 1504
Quote:Quote:

 

Thanks. Do you think that clarity is better than other BA earphones' you have heard?

 

The only ones I've heard are the Ortofon Eq-5 and the Rockit R50, and I prefer the BA200 over them.  The BA200 doesn't have as much clarity and detail as the R50, but it's better in almost every other way (bass, dynamics).  I also think the BA200 beats the E-q5 in every way including clarity and detail, but that's just from memory.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: