[Dsnuts]

The quality in cords are solid on both. The FX40 has the lesser microphonics and the CKM500 has a short cord to an extender cord..Both have excellent build as well. Nothing like a monster earphone where you have treat your earphone like they were made of pure gold.
 
I don't see anyone having any issues so far as cords are concerned. Both are excellent cord wise no issues on both though the cord leading to the FX40 are thin but I am not worried they will snap easily. I noticed the build on my older FXC51 are exactly the same using the exact same materials and as many times as I have wrapped those around my fingers and unwrapped them and put them in a pouch and just used them they are just like the day I opened them from the box. Same with AT cords. I noticed the one thing the Japanese get right on earphone design is one of the most fundamental and basic ones which is..Having a basic solid cord design.

 

[Prakhar]

Thanks Dsnuts.

 

[musubi1000]

My 40s already sound so wonderful I find myself what more could I possibly want or need these to do? And do I want to pay for more?

 

[headfinoob]

So I just picked up the HA–FR201.  I dig the bass, but these things are very nasty on the "S" sounds, and sound fairly harsh to my ears.  I'm not going to judge them yet, but I'm wondering how long they need for true burn in.  I'm seriously thinking of giving them about 1000 hours of a mix of music, especially nasty black/death metal, at moderate volume to see if that does the trick.
Coming from my Yuin PK3, which received plenty of burn-in before I listened to them, I'd say that the Yuins offer a more tonally balanced and pleasing sound.  I don't think they can touch the low bass of the JVC though.

 

[KEP1]

It's pretty shocking how many are finding the 101s/201s to have harsh sibilance. I'm guessing there are some QC issues or something.

 

[H20Fidelity]

Quote:

It's pretty shocking how many are finding the 101s/201s to have harsh sibilance. I'm guessing there are some QC issues or something.

I canceled my FX101 order for that reason, If it has any hair of similarity to FX1X treble I wouldn't of liked it.

 

[drkp80]

I had the sibilance issue on my FX101 as well. Comply tips fixed the problem and I'm very happy with them now.

 

[dnullify]

Yeah, i don't get it... because funnily enough, now i'm getting it with my FX101s that i've been using all week!
 
granted, i never burned them in, i simply just started using them. They're still oodles better amped than unamped, i'll say that much.
 
wonder if these are changing for the worse with burn it... silly late night speculation perhaps.
 
 
edit:  "no such thing" is a really good track for testing this, i'm not sure what is going on but the "ss" issue is most noticeable on that track. It's like there's a switch flipped when you go from fx40 to fx101, then again to the she3580.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

I'm curious as to how the fx40s will sound when i get home today.

Honestly I'm wondering if there was something different about the FX40s i got..

We should do a tally/poll to see what's going on here.
A) FX40s are harsh/painful             C) noticeable but not intolerable
B) FX101s are sibilant/painful         D) noticeable but not intolerable

E)Both are perfectly fine.


or something like that.


I mean we can all agree that the SHE3850 is mellow when it comes to the highs, right?

Not me. I'm the one who started the SHE3580 fad but I seem to be the only one who thinks their highs are too much. Like I said I found them to be the best thing since sliced bread only after EQing.

As an aside, the day Philips comes out with an actual SHE3850 would be a day of great trouble for me as 3 out of 5 people spell the 3580 as "3850" as it is

 

[kenchi1983]

I'm somewhat interested in the HAFX101 but I want to know more about their sound quality where it's being rated in a 1-10 scale.
 
I went over to ljokerl's massive iem thread and gathered most of the jvc buds and these are their sound quality scores:
 
JVC HA-FX34 Marshmallows 4.2  (I own)
JVC HA-FXC50 5.8
JVC HA-FX66 4.5
JVC HA-FX300 4.3
JVC HA-FXC80 6.5
JVC HA-FXT90 8.9

ViSang R01  6.3 (I own)
 
I read that the the fx40s are in progress of being reviewed. For anyone that have experience with the above iems, how would the fx101 fare against them? What sound quality score will you give the fx101?  The sibilance ( "s" sounds) issue is also putting me off slightly. Does the fx101 sound fatiguing even after burn in? I'm not a fan of the grado sound, too grating to my ears.
 
Since the Philips SHE3580 are being compared also, how would these rate in your opinion?

 

[KEP1]

Quote:

Does the fx101 sound fatiguing even after burn in? I'm not a fan of the grado sound, too grating to my ears.

No, the FX40 have harsher highs (the majority of the time lol). The FX101 after burn in are not fatiguing imo.

 

[Dsnuts]

You guys are making it seem like the FX101 and the FX40 are so sibilant and lively they are hard to listen to. The truth is. The FX40 detail level is one you have to adjust to yes but is no way too harsh for ears especially after burn in. The FX101 does have some minor spikes in the upper mids to give out more detail and are noticeable on some brighter recorded tunes but again not as crazy as people are saying. I listen to both for hours and both I can listen to without issue. 
 
I know both these are not perfect by any means, but for the given price points. Both are excellent values..

 

[Joe Bloggs]

You guys having treble troubles with your new phones really need to try EQing them with a parametric EQ as I mentioned in my SHE3580 thread.  It's made a world of difference to every pair of phones I own.
 
I mean here's one of the smoothest phones I own, the UE100, a gift from ljokerl.  Here's how they look like after I finally got around to doing my frequency analysis on them:

 
Never mind how V-shaped their frequency response looks like (the actual EQ I apply is the inverse of that shown here; I like an A-shape EQ on almost all my phones except the etys), just look at those treble spikes 5-6dB in height, they are there on every phone I measure by putting them in my ear.  That's just the way it is, no matter how flat the frequency response of a pair of phones measures in the lab, when you actually put them in your ear the ear canal resonances makes the FR go all over the place.
 
Just run sinegen through your phones, find the frequencies of the resonance peaks of your earphone-ear system, and EQ them down precisely using a parametric EQ like Electri-Q.  At least that's what I do on the computer--and the sound I get from that combo is so addictive that I now have to process all the music on my computer before putting them on my phone for playback on the go.  I envy those who got parametric EQ working on their phone with rockbox...

 

[ericp10]

I broke down and ordered the FX40 last night 

. Oh well, a buddy uses my FXT90 more than me, but I'm going to be upset if the FX40 sounds better than the FXT90... LOL

 

[eke2k6]

Quote:

I broke down and ordered the FX40 last night 

. Oh well, a buddy uses my FXT90 more than me, but I'm going to be upset if the FX40 sounds better than the FXT90... LOL

 
 

 
Yes! Now you can verify what me and Dsnuts have heard